Dublin Notes.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XV, Issue 40, 27 January 1888, Page 21

Dublin Notes.

• (From the National papers.) j The people of Dublin have shown their sense and toleration by allowing the renegade Liberals, Lord Hartington and Mr. Goschen, to come and go in peaoe. On Tuesday, November 29, these leaders addressed a meeting of Unionists in the Leinster Hall. Every precaution was taken by the managers of the affair to have the audience properly constituted, but for all that some of the men Who did not quite agree with the distinguished visitors got in and made themeelves heard at various points in the speeches where pungent punctuation is useful. Immense efforts were made to whip up a large meeting, and particular pains were taken to get as large a representation of Cawtholic unionism as posssble, but this was a miserable failure. Only about 60 Catholic names were visible on the list of the reception committee (numbering over seven hundred), and amongst all the fifty there is not one name of note. It has transpired that the Castle actually sent out the new Under-Secretary, Sir Joseph ".West Ridgeway, to tout for a Catholic host for Lord Hartington. Tie quest was successful. Mr. John Talbot Power, the distiller, was induced to invite Lord Hartington— a man whom, probably, he had never seen previously, and certainly never known. The Mail says it is authorised to say this is not true ; but that fact makes it all the truer. As an oratorical event the Leinster Hall affair was a dreary failure. Nothing could possibly be more depressing than the speech of Lord Hartington ; and nothing could possibly be more cheeky than the glib lying of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. As for the composition of the meeting, Sir William Harcourt i summed it up most acutely : " The baronets and knights, and the people who wish to be baronets and kuights, the lawyers, the landlords, the Emergencymen, the crowbar brigade, the sheriffs the bailiffs, and resident magistrates galore, and all the Orangemen and Oiangewonatn, the racing-men, thf hunting-men, and the horsedealers of Ireland ; the professors, the clergy, the scribes and the Pharisees, Trinity College Dublin ; and the distillers of the Lord Lieutenant s whitkey." To add a word to this would be painting the lily. And yet we should like if we had time to spare to dwell upon the fifty bogus Catholics who feast on a fast day, and whose most distinguished ornament was the immortal Sherlock, the robber of the widow's turkeys. It was a motley crew tbe sight of whom was enough to damp the ardour of the stoutest JSngliSQ Unionist and deter him from ever coming to Dublin to brin<* moral support to a coercing Chief Secretary. The great coerciouist demonstration in the Leinster Hall was held with a Scotchman in the chair, a triple cordon of police and detectives bristling round the building, and the chaunt of " G-od Save Ireland sounding through the windows. From the moment Lord Hartington set foot on Kingston Pier till be was whirled away from the meeting amid a storm of groans and hisses, the sounds of a hostile nation never left his ears. He and his companions were taught to realise how miserable the faction is which is kept by British bayonets on the necks of the Irish people, and bow great, unanimous, and intense is the sentiment which their presence in Dublin was meant to flout and intuit. There could not have i-een a meeting got up for them but fur the armed forces ot the Casile, the tremendous musier of police in the str ets, and the unparalled assemblage of detectives and policemeu in plain clothes who swarmed in the vestibules and corridors, and coninbated a considerable element to the crowd in the hall itself. Even within the meeting the voice of the people made itself heard all through, a jarring and minatory note spoiling the harmony. r *> The chief interest of the Unionist gathering lay in its external incidents. These euabled the renegade Liberal chiefs to ascertain by personal experience, the depth and intensity of the popular sentiment in Ireland, aud the reality of tbat nationalism which the untitled orator had the effrontery to stigmatise as bastard. Mr. Goschen stole into the city quite noiselessly, and so escaped attention. But it wa not so with tbe Marquis, Though he came in by the morning mail steamer, whicn arrives about six o'clock, and, therefore, in the dark, there was a considerable crowd of Nationalists on the pier at Kingstown to give him an assurance that the sentiment was not exactly what his Jewish companion dared to describe it. Five of the Towu Commissioners had drawn up an address assuring Lord Hartingtoo that Irishmen were ULalterable in their passionate desire for Home Kule ; and when he made his appearance an attempt was made to present the document— an attempt which resulted in the arrest of three gentlemen— Messrs. Hynes, T C. ; Woods, and Field. On being brought betore the magistrate all three were discharged, as there was uo offence to be laid to their charge— a decision which probably afforded as much satisfaction to the Castle as to the general public. But the incident at the pier was a mere trifle as compared with what took place at night outside the Leinster Hall. Though an immense force of police kept every street and »aneway leading to that building, somehow a crowd had collected on the space in front, and all through the proceedings they kept up a storm of booing and hooting, alternated with the singing of '• God save Ireland " and cheers for popular leaders which must have furnished curious food for reflection to the enobocracy and the sophists iuside. The booing and hooting at the close, when the principal orators were leaving the building, was terrific. Were it not for the overpowering force of police present some violent scenes must have taken place, as the Unionists and the j^cad element were iv an aggressive mood, and the men on the popular were by no means inclined,if opportunity presented itself, to baulk ttecn in their desires. The constitution of the Liberal Unionist Committee has been further blo i vn upon. Investigation discovers that, of the four hundred aud odd merchants representing " Mercantile Dublin," at least one hundred and fiity are employes of tbe two firms, Guinness, Son, and Co. and Pirn and Co. No fewer than eighty-four " merchants" were supplied by the Utter most famous house. Further investigation

would weed the list of many more " representatives," ■ire have no doubt. But no further fact ia needed to emphasise the miserable character of the attempt to give the meeting a " Liberal '! colouring. There are not twenty men in Dublin calling themselves Unionists, outside the official classes, who would not vote against a. bond fide Liberal as eagerly as against a Nationalist. And yet the Times tiaa the amazing courage to describe Lord Hartingtoa in the Leiuster Hall as a " Liberal addressing Liberals." When the demonstration needs such bolstering as this, one may judge of its value. Professor Galbraith's query to the Unionist : " Which of the divisions of Dublin are you going to carry ?" hits the blot that turns all these fireworks to smoke. An easier test than that even has beeu applied to the Unionist position, and it has not withstood the test. The municipal elections are over, and in not a Bingle instance was a Unionist successful. One representative gentleman presented himself for election in the Mercbants'-quay Ward, and he got two voteß 1 Yet mercantile Dublin is embraced in Unionism. The significance of these facts cannot be denied, especially when we remember the extremely narrow character of the municipal franchise. The weak sops which the imagination of Unionism consoles itself with are tbe surest measure of the despair of the supporters of that failing cause. One thing is sure, that Lord Harrington did not w*nt any information as to the condition of Ireland or the real wishes of the four millions of inhabitants who do not belong to the Unionist faction. At Kingstown three gentlemen Mr. Hynes, T.O. ; Mr. Edward Field, and Mr. Francis Wood offered him an address assuring him of the undying and unconquerable passion of the people of Ireland for Home Rule, but his lordship would not accept it, as the political Rip Van Winkle did not wish to be awakened from his dream that the Irish people were represented by the gangs of detectives, placemen, and sycophants who crowded round him in the Leinster Hall. The three gentlemen who proffered the address were given into charge by Mr. Watson, of the Steam packet Company, but when the case was brought before the diviiaonal magistrate it was at once sconted out of court and the three gentlemen released.

That Mr. Balfour is one of the meanest and most vindictive tyrants that ever gratified a spiteful disposition by torturing his fellow-men is a fact well recognised. But the letter in which he defends the cruelties he is practising at Tullamore must have surprised even those enemies of his who thought most lowly of him. Were it not that the printed letter stands before us in evidence we would be slow to believe that any creature would be so base, so vile, so mean, that when he had a political opponent locked up in a dungeon, he could avail of the occasion to send forth from some unspecified hiding-place a foul and lying libel on the man whom he holds muzzled and chained in Tullamore gaol. This is, however, what Mr. Balfour has done in a letter addressed to his " dear Armitage," and the manner in which he conveys the calumny makes the meanness all the more contemptible. " Mr. O'Brien," he says, " conceives himself to be fighting for principle — the only principle involved being tnat when a convicted prisoner who is able to plead a weak heart and delicate lungs refuses to attire himself in tbe proscribed prison dress, force will not be used." It is a gross lie for Balfour to impute to William O'Brien that he ever pleaded a " weak heart and delicate lungs " to screen him from the consequences of his acts. If in the lobby of the House of Commons Balfour dared utter such a slander in Wiliiam O'Brien's presence, he knows he would be fortuwith throttled and compelled to apologise for the falsehood. The world knows that the reason why Balfour has not employed force against Mr. O'Brien is, that his cowardly heart tells him that if O'Brien died ia ihe gaolers' hands, no power on earth could protect his murderer from the avenging justice of the Irish people. Mr. Balfour consoles himself for his defeat by spiteful calumny of his opponent, who cannot hear or answer him. " Tne fact is," he says, in his letter, "he is dealt with like any other ' criminal ' who could succeed in sheltering himself under a medical opinion." Open lying would be less despicable than the deliberate falsehood here implied. It is utterly false to the writer's knowledge that Mr. O'Brien for one moment sheltered, or sought to shelter, himself under a medical opinion. He has, on the contrary, from first to last disclaimed all favours on the ground of ill-health. He has challenged the Executive to do their worst within the law, and they have shrunk from the challenge. It was a medical officer deputed by Mr. Balfour himself that gave the certificate which frightened him from the last resort of brute violence.

One thing the letter makes quite clear. There were many sturdy, not over-scrupulous Tories heartily ashamed of the dastardly petty larceny policy at Tullamore. " Bless your heart," those people used to say, " Balfour knows nothing in the world about it. He does not trouble his head about it. It is the work of blundering and brutal officials in tbe gaol." This pretext cannot salve their consciences any longer. Balfour brags that the work was done under his personal direction. It was Balfour that put Mr. O'Brien on bread and water, until his doctor warned him he was playing a dangerous game. It was Balfour planned the midnight petty larceny of the clothes, and it is Balfour arranges the vindiciive details of the constant persecution to which his victim is still being subjected.

Mr. Balfour's character is so plainly written in his letter to " Dear Mr. Armitage," that he that runs may read. F0i1., , arrogance, cruelty, and cowardice are in every line of it. He had a double apology to make. An apology to the civilised world for his mean and merciless barbarity to a political opponent, an apology to the Tory Thugs of his own kidney for his utter failure to break down hie prisoner's spirit by insult and torture. Mr. O'Brien, he proclaims with unparalleled audacity, is not a political prisoner. He ranks in Mr. Balfour's mind and in his gaol with the pickpocket and the burglar. The reasons with which he attempt jto support his theory show a head as weak as his heart is hard. Mr. O'Brien is not a political prisoner, he contends, because he has committed an offence against the law. We might fairly answer he was never convicted of an offence ; he was never tried. He was imprisoned by directions of two manifestly corrupt partisans in the pay, and acting under the direotion and control, of the vindictive political opponent wao now

exults in his imprisonment. We waive that point. We accept the Balfour definition of wbat is not a political prißoner, and we ask what is 7 All prisoners, political or otherwise, are assumed to have • JM-oken the law, though the assumption in Ireland is a violent one jMd cd. If the motive does not aher the character of the office, whHt does f Was Hampdin a political prisoner ?— was Russell ?— was thvr« ever a political prisoner at all, according to the Balfourean code T The noblemen who, in all ages, have given their lives or liberties to raise iheir fellow-men are identified in his narrow soul with the mincreants who rob or murder fjr a five-pound note -are classed in the common categ >ry of breakers of the law. It is absurd to argue against such an absurdity. The piiiful quibble deceives no one. There is no man, whe her he exults in Wi'liacn O'Brien's imprisonment or deplores it, but admits in his beart of hearts that it is as a politician only he is in prison. Would Mr. Balfour have deemed it necessary to wri'e " dear Mr. Armitage " to vindicate his treatmen of a pickpocket! Even the fnends of his Govenment recoil in disgust from the billy cuhferfuge ot thia spiteful coward. •' No ruler,' writes tue Unionist Hoko, " can brand a man as a felon'againat tre L-onscience of the community ; and in an age like this the ruler who makes the attempt commits a blunder, the consequences of which are sure to recoil upon his own head."

A little while ago, at the municipal banquet in London, Mr. Balfour, with that eh irtning good taste which characterised him, declared he was not on Baca terms of convivial good fellowship with the Lord Mayor of the metropolis of the country he governed, and the gourmands at the Guild ball laughed consumedly at the joke Bight summonses served at the Mausion House by the direction of Mr. Balfour on the Lord Mayor of Dublin help us to appreciate the full flavour of the delicate aud graceful pleasantry. The time, place, and circumstances of the speaking L-ave nothing to be desired What was in Mr. Balfour's mind as he delicatdiy sipped his champagne and made mirth for the greasy aldermen was that soon he hoped to clap the Lord vlayor of Dublin into Tullamore Gaol. The notion was irresibtibly council v. hi< aerbetic sml. An old man, a genial cub ureci, com teou* gunil man, a gentle -md true-aearted patriot— bo icknuwl dged even by his opponents — was it uot delicious to think of tuis mm iv gaol, sending in a stjne-p*ved cell or stretched on a plank-oed, feeding on breal and water and enduring all the nameless insult an t tor.ure to wbicn Mr. M-indeville and tfr. O'Brien are being subjected I Is it any wonder the delicious thought gave n«w zeit to Mr. Balfoar's champ / K ne, aad bis graceful joke upon the BU'.j-ci set the L »ndou Mansion House tattle in a r^ar ? It wo ild be too excruciatingly funny if he conld manage to kill the old man in prison.

We doubt if modern annals could furnish any parallel for the brutality of prison torture wan ssed within tbe walls of Tullamore G k ol. ivot even Siberia, we venture to say, could in all its dark records outri val ihe sacking iniquity. The system of fine tortuie practis-doi Mr. O'Brien has a companion picture in the course of open outia^e ami wamon savagery ad. pied towards Mr. Mandeville. As that had, like Mr. O'brieu, refused to don prison dressj he was put upon a punishment diet of bread and water; but thi9 hiving failed to mate him surrender, hid cell was burst into at midnight t>y seven powerful warders, headed by the Governor, and his clothes were torn by mrtin force from bis back. Mr. Mandeville resisted the outrage as far as one a' hletic mm could, but he would probably nave b^en abL; to make a stiJJ belter fight had not his frame been weakened by the cruel process of starvation which he had un iergoue. He wrapped aims ;lf in the quilt and sheet of his bed, however, and paced wan naked feet the cold flags of his cell for the next twenty-four hours or so. But his tormantois were not going to allow him out of their clutches still. They would force him ioto the prison dress or kill him outright. They dashed into his cell again and toro the quilt and sh;ec from him, so that he had no rejource°but to wrap his towel around him for decency's sake, and in this scanty costume he was left to shiver in his cell for some time. Then the Governor came in, looked at his watch, and said, •• I'll give you five minutes to give up that tawel *nd put on these clothes," pointing to the prison suit ; and knowing that he wouid be lef c utterly naked, Mr. Mandeville was forced to yield, Similar brute force is to be employed, it seems, to compel him to perform the menial duties of hiscnil aad to suff.r the pollution of association with criminals. W« cannot sufficiently express our admiration of the plucky conduct of Mr. McNamara, of .Munis, thenewsagent who was pounced upon by the police f>r selling copies of United Ireland. Anything more utterly lawless ihan the nttack made upon him we have never heard ; and anything more shamelebsly indefensible than his convictiou by the wretched pair of Uas.le hacks, Cecil Jiocbe and Hodder, R.M.'h, was never seen even in an Irish court of " justice." Mr. MacNamara deserves the highest credit for the brave staad he made against the insolent aggression of the police. He fought his right inch by inch, and is determined still to fight L when he emerges from prison. He was sent need to seven days' incarceration for the crime of selling United Ireland, and seven more for the astounding atrocity of calling for a chei r for Mr. O'Brien when tbe first sentence was pronounced. But he is not the sort of a man, apparently, to be cowed by seven times that amount of punishment, or seventy times seven. MaoNamara courageously refused to condone his imprisonment by a single expreesiuu of apology or regret. " I will repeat my words again." he said, "if you desire it." It was a sight to see the fond pride of the old patriot- father in his courageous son. His last words to his wife as he left the court was an injunction that United should continue to be sold while he was in prison. So ended *jj«e magnanimous Balrours attempt to revenge the ridicule to which ti(iks have exposed him, by hurting in Knnis the circulation of the newspaper with which Mr. O'Brien's name is identified as editor. It will please him to know that our chculation in the town has increased a third by reason of the attempt — " Still the vengeance is sweet, Though not complete, Ana well may brave Balfour brag oE the feat." Our sprightly little contemporary, the Evening Telegraph, suggests

an amasmg conundrum oa the subject. United Ireland is regularly -akaa by every Oastle official, not excluding tfr. Balfour. Oan they be mdicted for conspiring with the newsboys to publish reports of the suppressed branches of the League ? We should like Pether's opinion ■ n the point. The wonderful joke of Mr. BUfour's " firm aui . dignified " aimimatratioa of law, and order in Ireland is beginning to fairly dawn even on his supporters in the Press. Tae Echo writes • '• The tailor who made Mr. O'Brien's mysterious suit oE clothes is in< a fair way to make his fortune unless the Government interferes. The ttuardiaos of the Fermoy Unioa have ordered a su.t of clothes each to be made of the same material. Really Mr. Balfour should put a stop to su3h an exhibition of disloyalty. As they send men to gaol for selling newspapers they can surely do so for wearing seditious breeches. Sub-section 1 of the secoad section of the Crimes Act includes almost everything that a man can do, and the Fermoy liuardians would certainly be convicted of a criminal conspiracy by the resident magistrates." The London correspondent of the Frteman bait jrs tna hint of the Echo by the suggestion, •• That Mr. Bilfour should proclaim the mjeung of the tailors engaged in mafc. ing those obnoxious garments as being a meeting convened for an unlawful purpose, and likely to lead to a '• breech " of the peace Surely there would be no difficulty in getting the usual sworn infer., mation to that effect." >'

The battering-ram of Colonel Tottenham at Wexford bida fair to out-do the pwaffia-oan of Mr. Boe at Gleabeigh. While Oolouel rottenham and hia brother "loyalists" were engaged in receiving Lord Hartington and Mr. Goscaeu in Dublin, his crowbar brigade, headed by the ferocious Wo jds, of Woodf jrd and Ooolgreany notoriety, and protected by two hundred constaoles, were engaged with a huge iroa-headed bitteri.ig-ram in levelling the bouaes of hia miserible tenaitry with the grouad. The utter reckless savagery of these teUo#s passes all belief. The houses, we read, shook to their founa*. uons at every cra-min* stroke of the great engine, and the iimarea escaped aim »ac by a mirae>e from th j crutnbliD^ ruins to fiad themselves in tae hauds of the pulic-) en route, via tne coercion cjuns, to gaol for tbeir resistance to law ani oid r.ascymbolisidin a batteringram. Only a fartuight ago the rent of the holding on this same Oatonel Tottenham's estate was reduced at one fell swo jp from £18 to £2. For all we know to the contrary it was the 'same fortunate tenant who on Tuesday last hid his h mse levelled to the ground for non-payment of a year's arrears of £18, of which £2 have been declared by the Land Commission to be reat and £16 robbery. Yet the coercionists blandly assure us that Irish tenants have now nothing on eaith to complain of. Gweedore was the biggest triumph the Plan has yet achieved— a glorious earnest of future triumphs. A little while ago and who so resolute as Captain Hill in the enforcement of Lord Salisbury's tamojs policy of pay or quit. His evictions reached to the magnitude of a campaign, For w^eks the police and soldiery marched and counter- marched in that wild and deso.ate region, and scenes of misery were witues»ed, and aces of biucality commuted tbat actual warfare could bcarcely paral.el. The English power was prostituted, Imperial treasure lavished luce water m the effort to dnve a hundred and thirty starving families from their homes. A tithe of tha sum spent on iheir extermination would have sufficjd to bring comfort to that poverty-stricken district. Behold the end of it all. The exterminator himselt, in whose aid an army was invoked, under the strong pressure of the Plan of Campaign, has gone down on his knees, confessed the iniquity of his demands, and implored t!ae forgiveness and forbearance of his persecuted tenantry. Captain Hill has been compelled to give in the end far more liberal concessions ihan were demanded in the beginning. Every one of the huudred and tbirty tenants goes back into his home. An ailround reduction of sixty per cent, is granted out of the rent, and Captain Hill has to pay the legal piper to the tune of £900 for his eviction diversion. It strikes us that firm and resolute Government looks remarkably foolish in the face of this settlement. The vast sums of public money might just as well have been thrown into the deep eea. The costly service of military and police for which tie public pays might have been just as usefully and far more innocently employed upon the treadmill. Of course, we will hare the stereotyped answer that the rights of property (meaning the landlords' rack-rents) must be preserved. But the trouble is tbat they have not been preserved. Quite the contrary. The rack-renter is far worse off at the end of the struggle than before. The public have a natural objection to pay the costs of these futile battles of coercion against the Plan of Campaign. Tenants and landlord— especially landlord— would have been better off if they had been permitted to settle their htile differences between themselves. The tenants throughout Ireland will not miss the lesson here taught. In spite of savage legislation and sham legislation, they are still absolutely safe behind the entrenchment of their own splendid organisation. No tenant in arrear is offered the slightest protection under the Land Act. The provision for payment in full by instalments is an empty mocktry. Lord Salisbury impresea upon ihe rack-renters that their only hope is eviction. Mr. Balfour places the armed forces of the empire at the evictors' disposal. Still the tenants, welded together like a wall of iron, despise and defy them all. The tenant no longer enters the Land Courts as of old with the sickening anxiety in his heart. For one thing, the Land Commissioners in many districts are opening their eyes to the requirements of the times. Reductions averaging from 50 to 60 per cent, fainy meet the justice of ihe case so far as future rents are concerned, leaving only the questi -n of arre irs to be dealt with by the Flan. But what fills the tenant's heart with absolute confidence — what enables him to meet his landloid with the upright port and firm eye of a freeman in spite of all the terrors of coercion, is the well-grounded conviction tbat if, from partiality or corruption, he fails to get full justice in court, he can well take it for himself outßide the court.

The scanty reporti in the Irish papers give but a very imperfect notion of tbe splendid work Mr. Dillon has been doing during his speaking tour in Scotland and England. He has had a serial of the finest meetings, often speaking at distant points on coosecutiTf

evenings, and the enthusiasm of the audiences has baeu most wonderful. On the 17th November he spoke at Inverness ; on the 18th at Dundee ; on the 19th at Galashiels; and on the 21st he addressed an immense gathering at Edinburgh. He bad a remarkable meeting at Campbelltuwn, Mull of Can«yre, on the 23rd. Campbell town is a very remote centre, nevertheless there were over four thousand people present, many of these being farmers who came a distance of fifteen miles to hear the Irish representative. On the 25th he spoke in Manchester, in Mr. Balfour's own constituency, addressing in the Free Trade Hall one of the largest and most representative assemblies that ever gathered in that historic building. Mr. Jacob Bright and all the leading Liberals of that great metropolis of commerce were on the plaiform. Mr. Dillon never spoke better in his life, and there was a perfect furore of enthusiasm. On the 28th Mr. Dillon addressed at Oxford a very notable gathering of the college dons, professors, graduates, and students, and made, the Oxford papers state, a profound impression. On the 30th he spoke at Barnstaple and on the Ist of December he closed one portion of bis list of engagements by addressing another English meeting. The following week Mr. Dillon proposed returning to Ireland. The great anti-coercion and Home Rule meeting held in the Leinster Hall on Thursday, November 24, under the presidency of the Lord Mayor of Dublin, was a splendid revelation as to the potency and extent of the forces arrayed against the coercionists, as well as a hopeful augury of the early triumph of the Irish cause. The numbers, tbe enthusiaßam, the timbre of the audience, the pronouncements of the bishops whose letters of apology were read, the utterance of the Liberal members come over to assail their Irish allies, all combined to make the demonstration what it was probabl7 — the most imposing of the many magnificent meetings held in the metropolis. Irish naionality, resistance to tyranny, hatred of oppression and sympathy with its victims; religion linked with patriotism, toleration, the blessed policy of the " union of hearts "—" — all these found representatives, and were voiced triumph-toned at this great gathering. He would be a hopelessly obtuse WestBriton, indeed, who, having viewed this scene and listened to the sentiments enunciated — c- pecially those given expression to by the advance guard of the army of progress in England could not realise that Castle rule, with all its abominations, has well-nigh reached the limit of ita blighting existence. One of tbe principal objects of the meeting was to protest against the inhuman treatment meted out to Mr. O'Brien and other political prisoners by the Tory so-called Government, and this was made tbe subject of denunciation, which cannot fail to penetrate even the shame-proof vesture of our pachydei matous chief-gaoler. Did the crimeleas captive of Tullamore anl bis co-victims desire revenge on the inhuman gang in office for the outrages and indignities inflicted upon them in defiance of law, one would think that the castigation administered by the Irish bishops in their letters to the meeting would almost balance the account. Rarely.'if ever, indeed, have the heads of tbe Catholic Church in Ireland expressed themselves in more indignant eloquence upon any public topic. Tbe enthusiastic cheering which greeted them testified how sensible the audience waß of the stunning nature of the blow delivered to the coercionist conspiracy, by these noble expressions of unsparing condemnation of the lawless regime which has replaced the constitution in Ireland, and which covered the whole grouod of opposition to the Tory substitute ihsrefor.

To paraphrase would be to detract from the force of these weighty and admirable declarations. The subjoined extracts give an idea of their spirit. The Archbishop of Dublin wrote avowing unabated regard for William O'Brien and protesting against the ' cruel though childish inhumanity " to which he has been subjected. Having expressed the high estimation in which he holds Balfour's coercion -made criminal, Cashel's patriotic prelate sounded the following note : — 11 Resolutions of sympathy will soothe, no doubt, the gentle, but irritated spirit of the imprisoned patriot ; and it is well, therefore, that such should he passed throughout the country. But if we desire, moreover, to nil his heart with joy and his dreary cell with light unquenchable, we should, at the same time, publicly pledge ourselves never to make peace with the so-called Government that is maltreating him, nor to enter into any truce or treaty with the exterminating anti-Irish garrison by which that mean and merciless Government is supported." The Archbishop of Tuara concluied bis communication with these striking and appropriate sentences :—": — " How strangely the lessons of history are lost on some men. Who are they that sow the permanent seeds of revolution ? Who but those that would fain perpetuate a condition of things at variance with the immutable laws of justice, which no human enactments can supersede ; who would even in a material scale rob the labourer of his hire, a crime which we know cries aloud for vengeance. Surely, in the ways of Providence, Buch crime must sooner or later be overtaken by retribution." Squally emphatic in condemnation were the bishops of Galway and Blphin. Thue wrote the Moat Rev. Dr. M'Cormack :—": — " I wish to join in the indignant and emphatic protest which your meeting will send forth against the mean and petty tyranny practised towards one of the best and most beloved of a uevote<i phalanx of Irishmau . . . . William O'Brien cannot be hunted down, his lion-hearted courage is indomitable ; a trat type of the noble cause that he so bravely represents. He is evidently prepared to give his life in the cause in which he has embarked. But. living or dead, the name oE William O'Brien will be enshrined in the faithful and grateful memory of his conntrymen and bis race." " When the Coercion Bill was introduced into Parliament," wrote Dr. Gillooly, " I protested against it, in common with the other bishops of Ireland, as unnecessary and unjustifi-

able. We predicted the fatal results which it was sure to produce.

Our protests and warnings were disregarded, bat the events of every % day since th# Bill became law have been demonstrating ihe justice and wisdom of oar opposition, as well as the utter incapacity of the present Government and Parliament to reform the evils and still more to satisfy the just requirements of the country." The Bishop of Cloyne wrote :— " I believe the country cannot too often or too strongly protest against the inhuman treatment to

wbioh William O'Brien and hia feliow-political prisoners hare been subjected. That rational sense of justice Innate in erery rightly-con-stituted mind, which requires that punishment both in kind and degree ehoald be proportionate to the offence, revolts against it. The offence for which William O'Brien has been thuß punished (if it can be called an offence) is one of those which leans much more to the side of virtue than of crime." And from Dr. Donnelly, in the North, came the following :—": — " No words of denunciation can be too strong for the deserts of the case, no measure! of retaliation within the Ten Commandments too extreme for my sympathy and approval." The Bishops of Meath, Olonfert, Dromore, and JKildar* also joined in th« protest. The coercioaists may wall be congratulated on their labours when these are the results.