IRELAND.
At the meeting of the Repeal Association, on Monday, Mr. O'Connell devoted a long speech to remarks on the last report by the Times Commis- sioner on Darrynane; expressly premising, that he should not answer the Commissioner until he had heard further from Mr. Maurice O'Connell. As a preface to his counter-attack, he revived some of the old complaints against the Times for its abuse of the Roman Catholic clergy—the " surpliced ruffians," &c.; and for " eulogizing " the recent work of an " infidel " tra- ducer of the priesthood all over Europe, K Michelet. He made a plentiful use of the words liar" and " lie " as applied to the Times, its Commis- sioner, Mr. Foster, and its "Assistant Commissioner," Mr. Russell; and he entered into various details, a few points of which may be given as speci- mens of the way in which he encountered the charges against him.
He accused the Commissioner and reporter of having, in their recent visit to his estates, purposely overlooked places which are thriving. He denied that Connell was his " agent ": he was only a clerk; and he was a miraclo of Father Mathew's—a drunkard who had lost his situation by drink, took the pledge, and was then au upright honest man: Mr. Connell did not say one word to corrobo- rate the statements of the Commissioner. The Commissioner visited Kilcomans : it was a farm which fell into him; he built the houses which were upon it, and he did not replace them when they were getting bad; and why 2—because there was a new road built near, and they were to be removed to it as soon as the ground was prepared. When originally built by him, at his own expense—and he was the first to intro- duce that custom into that part of Ireland—the people used to come three or four miles to see them. They were, he admitted, then, the worst cottages about the neighbourhood; and he was glad of it, for they would soon be rebuilt. Next they alluded to the Darrynane farm, and said he put a man out of it, and was there- fore an exterminating landlord: but what was the fact 2—if he did so, he gave him 701. in his hand—the first time the tenant-right was recognized in the West; and he would for ever act upon it. At Ardcara, the Commissioner and reporter found a woman in a cabin, and a cracked pot: they were told by the poor woman that she was let in by charity, fed by charity, and paid no rent. Now here was an accusation against him—he was actually accused of being humane I This poor woman's child was taken sick; and because his humane tenants gave her a hovel, and an old iron pot to boil a few potatoes, which they also gave her, he was to be accused of inhumanity and extermination; in fact, he was to be reprobated because his tenants—God bless them!—followed his precepts and example as to humanity and charity. Foster and Russell alluded to the Keatinges, and said their houses were not well furnished. Now that was not the fact. They were right well furnished; and they would have seen them so in the morning, if they had gone then, and not iii the dark, as they did, almost at night. A great deal was said in these letters about the Marquis of Lansdowne as a landlord: but the Commissioners themselves showed that the rent charged by the Marquis was one- third or sometimes two-thirds more than the rent which Air. O'Connell received from his tenants. On his land the valuation was as low as possible; and, with one or two exceptions, his was the only land that was let as low as the valuation. No attempt was made to controvert the statement that he was "a kind and indulgent landlord." It was not asserted that he had ever brought an ejectment against a tenant, or turned a man out of possession. He was not charged with having evicted tenants. The accusation against him was that he had poor tenants, and that he had not turned them away because they were poor. He did not think that poverty was a crime—the cruelty was turning out the poor; and he had, thank -Heaven, 134 cot-holders upon his property, paying from a shilling to a pound—a mere nominal rent. He had rescued 134 families from starvation by these means. That was his pride and boast. These two vagabonds had made the mighty discovery that there were poor persons upon his property. He thanked God that there were .• persons upon his property, for he had nourished and cherished them. 7 e was the first who had introduced improvements, and laid the foundation for the tenant-right of the country. He had protected the people, and he would continue that protection. In the entire of Ireland, there was not so peaceable, so tranquil, so quiet, and so loyal a people, as those of his district. Who heard of agrarian disturbances there? He was the receptacle and protector of the distressed tenants who were driven from their property. Yes, he was their protector. He was not ashamed to boast of it; but he thanked God that he had the opportunity of acting the part of a protector to the desolate. He was not done with the Commissioners—at least, only for the present; and on a future occasion he would meet them fully on every point, when he heard from his son Maurice: in the mean time, he boldly threw himself upon the people of Ireland to judge between him and his calumniators.
In the course of his speech, Mr. O'Connell read a long letter from his son Maurice, giving his version of the Times Commissioner's inspection of the Kerry estates. This narrative goes over precisely the same ground as that traversed in the letters of the Commissioner and reporter last week; only that everything is set forth in the best instead of the worst light. The Commissioner is represented as seeking out the worst parts of the estates, and the worst cottages, hastily overlooking the best; while the re- porter is made frequently to admit that houses which are passed by the party are evidently " good " or " comfortable ";.and at such times he pro- mises, at the instance of Mr. Maurice, " to make a note of it." Conversa- tions with tenants called up by Mr. Maurice O'Connell, in which the men depose to their own thriving circumstances and their landlord's indulgent treatment, are dwelt upon as valuable testimony. Sometimes the same things are mentioned in terms that exhibit the different standards applied by the Irish and the English scrutinizers: one of a set of houses, which Mr. Maurice admits to be the worst on the land, and which seem to have filled the Englishmen with disgust and horror, he pronounces to be " pretty good." A few passages in the letter involve curious admissions. The
writer had pointed out to his companions Mahony, a pound-keeper, as a "lot-holder —
Mahouy said he was; that he had a lot of his own, and had bought two others from the former holders; that he paid 21. 16s. for the three; that he had bought another, but that I had decided that the daughter of the setter and her husband had a better right to it, as he had so much land before, and that I had settled that they were to repay him the purchase-money by instalments, which they were doing. I think Mr. Russell made notes of all these matters."
[Thus we find Mr. O'Connell's son and agent impeding the transfer of land, keeping up its subdivision, using his influence to set aside a bargain already completed, and doing so without even placing the purchaser in as favourable a position as before, by insisting on an immediate return of his purchase-money!] It will be recollected that one of Mr. O'Connell's defenders had boasted that mangel-wurael was grown on his estate: here is Mr. Maurice's state- ment on that point-
" Foster asked if the people grew any turnips or mangel-wurzel? —I said, No; that they thought the potato a more profitable crop, as they were skilful in the managing thereof, and knew little of the others; that I offered them seed, and would be glad to instruct them, but that they did not like leaving their old ways, and it would take time to effect any changes; and there was no use in trying to force anything upon them. Do they drain well?'—Indeed they do, said I; after their own fashion."
Mr. O'Connell had been accused of "driving" cattle for rent: Mr. Maurice's defence is pregnant with admissions-
" I then said, There is one thing to be said of my father, which I believe no other landlord in Ireland can say, namely, that since he got possession of his paternal property, in the year 1809, to the present day, there has not been a single in- stance of the sale of a distress for rent. Have no cattle been distmined?' asked he. Yes, said I; but no sale. The practice in the South of Ireland is to use the pound as a species of compulsory process. You will find it stated in Wiggins's Monster Misery of Ireland It was grown so much into a habit that tenants scarcely believe a landlord or tenant is in earnest unless their cattle is driven. It is an old, almost universal practice; • which I have set my face against, and I hope to do away with it altogether. It strikes me as illegal, said he. Why, simply of itself it would be; but there are generally arrears due, which give the right to distrain, and it is used as I tell you. I referred him to Wiggins's book for details of the practice, and then said that Twiss's story was a falsehood; that he alleged lie was staying at Butler's at the time, and that Butler was ready to, prove that there was no such distress at any time as that Twiss spoke of; that cattle certainly had been sometimes pounded on myfather's property, as elsewhere, but that they were never sold. I repeated, that it was a bad practice, and that I ire
t, and hoped to do away with it." The parting with the two Englishmen-
" Russell appeared pleased with the favourable appearance of what he saw. Foster was as sulky as a bear with a sore head; and is as thorough a specimen of a Cockney as ever clipped the Queen's English. He appeared very anxious to get away from this: Russell inclined to remain, so as to get as much information as possible. As we came out, we met Father Patrick 0 Connell, the parish-priest. I introduced Russell to him; and he was about entering into conversation, when Foster hurried him into the car; and Russell had only time to say, I am sorry, Sir, our interview is so short.' "
The rent for the week was 2371.
A lamentable accident happened in the neighbourhood of Coleraine, on Christ-. mss-day, which caused the death of John M'Curdy, Esq., of Magilligan, a most respectable gentleman. It appears that Mr. M'Curdy was out shooting, attended by his servant; to whom he gave directions to fire after himself at any bird that he might chance to miss. The man in obeying these insVnetions fired, and, im- happify, lodged the contents of his gun in his master's head, killing irim on the spot.—Morning Post.
Previous page
