HOME RULE FOR IRELAND.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XX, Issue 51, 7 October 1892, Page 5

HOME RULE FOR IRELAND.

We take from the Thames Examiner the following report of a paper lately read at the Tapu Mutual by Mr R. M. Hawkes :— Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, — It is with great diffidence that I stand before yon, to offer a few reasons why 1 think Home Rule will be beneficial to the Irish people. In the few remarks I propose to make this evening there will be some subjects which I ■ wish were placed in better bands, but 1 will do my best according to my ability. I will be careful in my argument)* to lay nothing before' yon which are not historical facts, and if my pleading has your sympathy I shall feel fully recompensed. First, then, I will try to define the meaning of itbe expression "Home Rnje," which, as nearly as I can see, meand " Local Self-Guvernment." Or, in other words, the people are desirous to have the management of their local affairs. That they should have an Irish House, which would make laws for tbe welfare of the people ; regulate the laws between landlord and tenant ; encourage local industry in every form ; possibly have tbe control of the affairs of justice, and act in every legitimate way for the benefit of the people, precisely as we here in New Zealand manage onr own affairs, but not to the extent we enjoy, for all laws so framed *are to be subjected to the British Houses of Parliament, and cannot actually become law until approved by those Houses. A good many run away with the idea that tbe granting of Home Rule to Ireland means the disruption or breaking np of the British Umpire, but nothing could be more fallacious. The Irish, with all their faults and follies, which they are generally understood to possess to a high degree, are not nearly so foolish as to think they would be better off by a dis-union with the British Empire. No, indeed, the leaders of tbe Irish people are now fully alive to the fact that unity is strength, and too well aware that the machinery of working petty States is too cumbersome, expensive, and blso too risky for our nineteenth century. As history clearly shows, that small kingdoms, or principaiitiee, have the most of their revenues abjorbed by the machinery of Government, and in many or, indeed, in most cases, are eventually absorbed by some stronger power. But apart from this view, let us calmly consider who are the men now in the British Parliament pledged to Home Rule. Are they all mad-headed Irishmen '! Oh dear no. Ido not need to weary yon by giving the names of those gentlemen who are Mr Gladstone's pledged supporters, for you must all know as well as I do that they are drawn from every portion of the British Kingdom, from Land's End to John O'Qroat'a Sound. Strong-minded, hard-headed men, who have thoroughly well considered the step they are about to take, and though their views are liberal and they think the workingman has a stake in the nation, I doubt^if one of them wonld do an action knowingly calculated to weaken the prestige cf tbe British dominion. lam rather inclined to believe that if occasion required, each and every one of them would shed his blood in defence of the nation. Are they, then, only mad on this one subject ? Just that, if you think every social reform is madness. I will give yon a few examples of the difficulty attending reforms in tbe present century, and how in all cases certain classes raised a howl that each and every one, if granted, would be ruinous to tbe State. But time baa shown the reformers were right, while the old Conservative ■ticklers were equally wrong. I quote from the " History of the Nineteenth Century," by Robert McKenzie :— "ln the year 18J5 a new Corn Law was passed, the object of which was to make the poor man's bread dear, that the rich man's rental might be high. No foreign grain was to be imported uotil wheat in the home market had been for six months at over 80s per quarter. The object of this arrangement was to keep the price of wheat steady at a point not far from 90s, a price which could not fail to satisfy the landowners and farmers, however it might fare with the consumers. For thirty years this Corn Law was a blight and a curse to tbe British people, famines being of frequent occurrence. In Edinburgh one in every eight of tbe population was maintained by the charity of the others. Taxation was monstrous. The criminal laws were savage, and they were administered in a spirit appropriately relentless. Tbe feeling of the time wae so entirely in favour of severity, that Edward Burke said he could obtain the assent of the House of Commons to any Bill imposing the punishment of death. Our law recognised 223 capital offences. If a man iiijured Westminster bridge he was banged ; disguised oh a public road he was hanged, cnt down a sapling, shot a rabbit, stole property value ss, stole anything from ft bleak field, wrote a threatening letter, and other trifles too

numerous, for all these be was hanged, even children of tender years were hanged, and the man who raised his voice against this shame> fnl proceednre, was told his action was an incentive to crime. Slavery existed in Scotland to the very la9t of the eighteenth century, the colliers and gaiters were slaves bound to their service for life, bought and sold with the works in which they laboured. Women aod children worked in coal pits. They dragged about little waggons by a chain fastened round their waists, crawling like brutes on their bands and feet In the dark. The horrors among which they lived induoed disease and early death. Law did not reach them, and the hopeless children were'often mutilated, and occasionally killed. There was no .machinery to drag the coal to the surface, and women climbed along wooden ladders with baskets of coal on their backs. I will now proceed to Parliamentary reform in the present oentury, always quoting the same author, and will bigio with tbe Reform Bill. The necessity for reform, in our system of representation, had been recognised long ago. Lord Chatham and his son William Pitt, agitated for it, but in a sort of milk and water way. When the people, moved by that great man William Cobbett, strove by every lawful means to gain their point, the Government of the day believed that the new impulse which had seised the masses threatened danger to the country ; that every papular leader w*s a traitor ; that every demand for political privilegesTOß seditions. They spumed the thought of concession, and prepared to carry out inflexibly to its bitter end the polidy of forcible suppression. The feeling deepened rapidly among a suffering people, that they were ruined by this Government. Huge meetings expressing themselves by monster petitions were continually held. The Government were resolute to extiuguish by military force tbe discontent of the people. The Man* Chester reformers held a meeting of 60,000 persons with no design but to petition for Parliamentary reform. A strong military force was provided by the authorities, infantry, cavalry and artillery. The proceedings had scarcely begun, when a large body of mounted yoe* manry dashed among the defenceless multitude, many men, women, and little children were killed and wounded. The thanks of the Prince Regent were promptly offered to the magistrates who directed this wicked and cowardly slaughter, and ail the leaders of the meet* ing received various terms of imprisonment. This occurred in 1819, and the struggle was not terminated until 1832, under tbe administration of Earl Gray. I have gone into this subject mort fully than perhaps my object required, but with this purpose, that I want to show you that the English people had to work Bteadily and persistently to gain their social reforms. J will now giva a little illustration of some of the wrongs the Irish Catholics suffered ia thise days, always quoting from tbe same author. " During the 18th century the Irish Parliament was composed of Protestants of an exceedingly bitter type, and had heaped upon the unhappy Catholics of Ireland an accumulation of the most wicked laws which have ever been expressed in the English tongue. A Catholic could not sit in Parliament, could not bold any office under tbe Crown, could not vote at an election, could not be a solicitor, physician, sheriff, or gamekeeper. If a son became a Protestant he was withdrawn from parental enstody, and entrusted to Protestant relatives, while bis father was bound to ma ntaia him. A Catholic was nit permitted to own a horse worth more than £5, if he had a more valuable animal he was bound to sell to a Protest id t for that moaey. If a younger brother tnrned Protestant, he supplanted the elder io bis birthright A C>tholic could not inherit from an intestate relative, however near ; a Pro tt stan t solicitor who married a Catholic was disqualified. Marriages of Protest aDts and Catholics, if performed by a priest, were annulled, and the priest was banged ; rewards were offered for the discovery of Oatho'ic clergymen. At one time five-sixths of the British infantry were employed ia maintaining the tranquility of this unbappy country. Despite the Kicg tbe claims of the Catholics came every year before Parliament with steadily growing support. In Ireland the agitation was governei by Daniel O'Connell. O'Connell's eloquence was irresistible. He became a power which no Government could resist. A Bill to remove Catholic disabilities was introduced. The Bill quickly became law, and its earliest fruits was the return of O'Connell." I will now pass on to the free trade policy which gave to the working man a cheap loaf. I will not dwell on tbe struggle of the masses to gain food at a reasonable price, but to show how bitterly tbe classes held out Bgainst the rights of the people The straggle which began io 1820 was not brought to a successful ifesue until 1846 nnder Sir Robert Peel. I quote as before. Ho proposed the total repeal of tha Corn Law, a fierce contest ensaed in which Mr Disraeli earned fame aod the leadership of tbe Tory party by his envenomed resistance to a measure without which it is difficult to imagine bow the national existence could have been preserved. The next serious wrong againat tbe Irish people waa.the maintenance of the Irish Church. As this is, as it were, a question of yesterday, Ido not purpose to go into the subject, but after, as usual, a most bitter opposition Mr Gladstone succeeded in removing this incubus. I now think I have given you sufficient examplas to satisfy you that all the social reforms of this century have only been gained after loug and bitter struggles, often resulting in the shedding of inuocsnt blood;

and always with the cry of tbe dominant classes that the granting of those reforms would be ruinous to the State, but time has proved the reverse. Before I again refer to the details it occurs to me that I might here give you a picture from real life of my own experience and what I saw in the few short years I was an Irishman, or rather Irish lad, as I was born in 1841, and migrated to our happy New Zealand early in 1863, where the crowbar brigade are unknown. My earliest recollections are associated with tbe famine in 1847 and 1848. You may think I was too young to have any very distinct recollection of those sad ti>nes, but I tell you every item I saw of that fearful time of hunger and death, is indelibly burnt on my brain, and will only cea<e with life. Were I to tell you of all tbe sad phases of hunger which 1 conld not help witnessing, it would occupy a good many hours, and the story would fill a tidy size volume, bat I will refer to just two or three incidents and yon may imagine the rest at yonr leisure. I was bora in a country district about twenty miles westward from tbe city of Cork. Oar house was close by the churchyard, and the parish dispensary was attached to the house. I don't know when these institutions wsre first initiated, but I think they were contemporary with tbe famine, and most have began about 1848. Now as destitution always makes for anywhere that relief can be obtained, it is quite probable that I may have seen more than even neighbours living close by. Our dispensary doctor wbb a very rough, but good-hearted man, and God knows the heart-rending scenes that he had to witness would drive any weak-minded man mad. The poor people, famishing for food, would implore tbe doctor for medicine to make them strong, as they would express it, but the only prescription he would give them was not in his medicine chest, and be could only recommend nourishing food, which was like throwing straws to a drowning man. Tbe graveyard soon became a busy mart, and the parish authorities had to employ men to put the corpses under ground. The cost of finding coffins for the increasing number of deaths was too much evidently for their slender resources, so they hit on a cheap and equally expeditious plan. A good, large-sized bole was dug, capable of holding some twenty or thirty bodies, and a rough shell, or a substitute for a coffin, built, with the bottom hung on binges. Into this the corpse was put, and when over the pit the catch was opened and the shell was again ready for another tenant. When the pit was pretty, well filled another was prepared. One sight I saw which I well remember ; it was just about dusk in the evening, A poor womani carrying a big boy on her back ; be had on an old pair of cord trousers and an old cotton sbirt, feet and head were bare. She carried an old spade with her, and I soon saw her mission. I don't know how far she brought that ghastly load, bat it mast have been a considerable distance, as she appeared a perfect stranger. She seemed too much exhausted with hanger and fatigue to dig anything of a grave, bnt the poor creatuie covered the body as well as sha could, while all the time her heart seemed bursting. Her moans and lamentations were pitiful It was quite dark when she left, I came back quite early next morning to look at the poor grave, but it was tenantless — the starving dogs scented that prey through the night and held high carnival. (To he concluded.")