IREL A.ND FROM 1798 TO 1898.* JUDGE O'CONNOR MORRIS combines,
in an unusual degree, the qualifications to be desired in one who undertakes to write on the subject indicated by the heading of this article. He is an Irish Unionist, of the proprietorial class, and at the same time of distinctly Liberal antecedents and broad sympathies. Being, moreover, one who "through a long forensic and
• Ireland, 1798-1898. By William O'Connor Morris, County Court Judge 192.1 Chairman of Quarter Sessions for the United Comities of Roscommon gum' taiiiro. London; A. D. Innes and Co.
judicial career" has "become familiar with the ideas, the sentiments, the ways, the tendencies of his fellow-countrymen of all sorts and conditions," Judge O'Connor Morris, if any one, deserves to be heard on the century of Irish history through so much of which he has lived.
It is, in the main, a gloomy narrative which be has to set forth,—whether from the point of view of England or of Ireland. The hideous story of the savage Rebellion of 1798 and its atrocious repression, in a semi-independent Ireland, would have almost excused, if anything could, the wholesale corruption resorted to in order to bring that unhappy country, duly represented at Westminster, under direct Im- perial control. But what could excuse the delay for a generation of those measures of emancipation by the care- fully taught expectation of whiclr the opposition of the Roman Catholics to the Union had been disarmed,—and their concession at last only through a soldier-statesman's avowed fear of civil war ? What worse lesson could ever be taught to a people in static pupillari, either as to the justice or as to the strength of purpose of the dominant and guardian race ? Our author is certainly far from erring on the side of severity in his judgment of England's failure of duty towards Ireland in respect of the delay of Catholic emancipation. He exposes it clearly, but he lays more stress, and, in our opinion, quite justly, on the disastrous character of the blunder com- mitted in 1829, and persistently repeated at critical junc- tures since, until the hope of its reversal now seems past, in the withholding of a suitable provision from the Roman Catholic clergy. As he shows in his ex- cellent sketch of the rise of O'Connell, the priests had loyally co-operated with that remarkable man in discouraging outrage, and every consideration alike of large statesmanship and of simple good faith prompted to a complete fulfilment of the expectations authoritatively held out to the Roman Catholics in the months preceding the Union. But the opinion of Protestant England on this subject did not recog- nise obligations to Romanists, and was equally blind to the great advantages which would have been secured by liberating the spiritual guides of the Irish people from dependence on the offerings of their ignorant and excitable flocks. Re- peatedly the opportunity recurred, but it was always either ignored or deliberately put aside. The last, and contrary to the usual course of human affairs, the best, opportunity for a great act of true Liberalism in ecclesiastical statesman- ship presented itself at the time of the disestablishment of the Anglican Church in Ireland in 1869. The late Lord Russell was very strongly in favour of a large assignment out of the revenues of the disestablished Church for the benefit of the Roman Catholic priesthood,—much larger, indeed, as Judge O'Connor Morris points out, than was pro- posed by O'Connell himself thirty-six years before. But in deference, to a considerable extent, to the Liberation Society, the path of justice and enlightened policy was once more avoided. The nerve of statesmen failed, and the opportunity of making the abolition of a grievance a positively remedial measure was thrown away.
Such failures always bring their Nemesis. The punishment for the lamentable triumph of narrow - minded prejudice throughout the century, in regard to the shepherds of the Irish people, has been conspicuous. Within ten years of the disestablishment of the Irish Church there began perhaps the most sordid and immoral popular movement by which any country was ever cursed, and certainly the most dangerous con. spiracy against British authority set on foot during the present century. Judge O'Connor Morris's sketch of the rise and progress of the Land League is both clear and interesting, and brings out very usefully its double aspect, as intended, in Parnell's words, to "partake of a constitutional and illegal character,"—to "use the constitution for its own purposes, but to take advantage of its secret combination." Among the peasantry it appealed frankly to the lowest of motives ; it organised a barbarous system of social persecution, and it notoriously tolerated the enforcement of the boy- cotting code by sanguinary sanctions. Such a system might reasonably have been expected to meet with strenuous and effective resistance from the Roman Catholic priests in Ireland, who, in other respects, as is well known, have a most powerful influence for good over their parishioners. It was unquestionably in large measure due to their dependent position that, as the Land League progressed, though at first
its teachings had been very generally opposed by the priests, it was joined by them in increasing numbers, and that its thinly disguised successor, the National League, secured still more numerous adhesions from among them.
A perusal of Judge O'Connor Morris's book will also con- strain most readers to the conclusion that the morbid social condition of Ireland, which was utilised by unscrupulous politicians for the creation of a brutal and dangerous move- ment, was in itself very largely due to the manner in which, for nearly three-quarters of a century from the Union, British statesmen and British public opinion had ignored the essen- tial facts of Irish agrarian tenures; and had legislated against rather than in support of the equities involved in them. The Ads passed at different periods for facilitating ejectment, without making any kind of provision for the protection of the tenant's interest—an interest created by the fact that he, or his predecessor in title, had as a rule given his farm its main equipment—were grossly unjust. Equally so was the encouragement given by authority, at the time of the setting up of the Encumbered Estates Court after the great Famine, to the belief that monied men buying up the lands of impoverished Irish proprietors could make a good thing out of the investment by raising the rents. The object —that of enlisting British capital in the development of Irish agriculture—was excellent, but the methods adopted were cruel to the old embarrassed landlords, who were suddenly forced to sell in a gorged market, and to their tenants, whose rents were often raised without any inquiry as to their claims to equitable consideration. From 1870 onwards Parliament has been endeavouring to solve the problem of—to use a phrase more than once employed by our author—reconciling law with fact in the Irish agrarian sphere. Unfortunately, if we are to accept the opinion of Judge O'Connor Morris, than whom few can be better qualified to form a sound judgment on the subject, the problem has indeed " passed the wit" of oar legislators, and the efforts made have resulted in injustice to the landlords nearly, if not quite, as grievous as that to which tenants were previously liable. He appears to think that Mr. Gladstone's Act of 1870 held the balance fairly even between landlord and tenant, and in its outlines had much to recommend it. But it was, in his opinion, too subtle in its methods of operation to be comprehended by the peasantry, and it lent itself to evasion by pressure on the part of unscrupulous landlords and agents, who, under threat, express or implied, of eviction, raised rents in such a manner as to reduce the value of the tenant's interest, which the Act was designed to protect. To afford an effectual guarantee against grievances of that kind, it is plainly Judge O'Connor Morris's opinion that legislation giving practical fixity of tenure at rents determined by a State Tribunal was necessary. His objections, therefore, to Mr. Gladstone's second Land Act, of 1881, though very strong and very severely expressed, are not directed against what, from an English point of view at any rate, are its leading principles, but against the methods by which force was given to them. lie condemns as costly and unsettling the provision, which no doubt recently necessitated fresh legislation, for a refixing of rents, if desired by either party, at the end of fifteen years, and then passes very severe strictures upon the pre- sent Land Courts and their working. They have, in his view, lowered rents in so wholesale and indiscriminate a manner as to amount to a virtual confiscation of a substantial portion of the landlord's interest. And while the constitution of the Courts and the directions, or absence of directions, under which they act remain as at present, he expects this process to continue. His remedies in outline are as follows. Rents ...speaking generally, though with important exceptions— "should be fixed for the length" of leases, of long duration and perhaps perpetual, "and they should be fixed by a valua- tion made by the State, a certain allowance for improvements being made on the spot, with a right of appeal, but at the peril of law costs, to a tribunal consisting of a single Judge of established reputation, one for each province, the Judge being assisted by trained agricultural experts." Our author Claims that the Fry Commission has suggested a scheme for fixing Irish rents by the State nearly the same as that Which he has advocated. The Government, it may be pre- sumed, will give their serious attention to this question, and to the claim, to which Judge O'Connor Morris gives his weighty support, for compensation to the landlords, who, he maintains, have undoubtedly been "wronged and despoiled." It "could be best afforded," in his judgment, "by advances
made by the State for paying off mortgages at a low rate of interest, the State issuing debentures, which could float in the market." The State also, having re- duced rents, ought, it is very plausibly contended, to reduce family charges. Our author, it is right to observe, is un- favourable to extensive schemes of buying out the landlords, and above all to doing so compulsorily.
We cannot pretend that the whole subject is not still beset with difficulties. In particular, though with all respect forJudge Morris, we cannot but feel that some provision for the auto- matic variation of rents, within limits, in accordance with the state of crops and prices, would be juster and more likely to work smoothly than a system of rents absolutely fixed for a very long period, which, we cannot but fear, might give rise to inconvenient agitations. At the same time, it must be fully acknowledged that there is much that is very unsatisfactory about the present state of landed relations in Ireland, and that it is neither right nor politic for English public opinion to turn away from the subject because a state of comparative quiet prevails. If Judge O'Connor Morris's book brings out afresh the per- plexities of Irish questions and the possibilities of grave error on the part of Parliament, even when animated by good intentions, it enforces, even more plainly, if possible, the importance of avoiding moods of indifference in regard to Irish affairs. For England to throw responsibility for the course of those affairs on an Irish Parliament would be a most futile and culpable—to our mind even criminal— endeavour to elude the consequences of past sins and errors. But if we retain, as we must, the direct control of Ireland in the hands of the Imperial Parliament, and are com- pelled, as from time to time we may be, to run counter to a large body of Irish feeling, it is our bounden duty to pay continuous attention to the questions which interest our Irish fellow-subjects, and to do all we can to under- stand their points of. view and the special conditions of their life. Only so can we qualify ourselves to discharge the functions of the dominant partner with more of know- ledge, as well as of sympathy, than is frequently re- vealed in the story told plainly, and in the main justly, by Judge O'Connor Morris.
Previous page
