notwithstanding this sop to the agitators, lawlessness continued to grow and extend. Mr Birrell at length found it necessary in the month of November to concede the unsatisfactory condition of parts of Ireland, and at Southampton and Belfast entered upon his defence, if defence it can be called. Cattle driving,' he said, 'is an illegal conspiracy, and I am not here to draw distinctions between one kind of offence and another.' Compare his previous apology that it was not cattle lifting' or 'predatory.' He went on to declare, We have done all, and are doing all a Government can do within the power of the law to put this thing down.' Poor Mr Birrell! Impotent indeed must be the law if it so readily yields to the power of the mob that private property can be openly assailed day and night and no person held amenable! He complained that certain of the ordinary magistrates 'refused to convict people of offences clearly brought against them,' while other magistrates stayed away and 'say they do not want to get across the people and be boycotted.' What an admission of impotence from the representative of a Government which has complete control over the appointment and dismissal of magistrates! But what action was taken with reference to these delinquent magistrates? His charge against them is one of dishonesty in the exercise of their judicial functions. Are they still magistrates, and is the peace of Ireland still in their keeping? One would also like to ask what encouragement Mr Birrell gave to the magistrates who were afraid of the boycott. Was he prepared to punish the wrongdoers if the magistrates were boycotted, and if so, how? And does not Mr Birrell see that the very fact of their staying away in fear is the very strongest condemnation of his failure to uphold the law and give protection? Mr Birrell declined, even in these circumstances, to use the Crimes Act. And why? What,' he said, 'was the position of the Liberal party? They opposed that permanent Coercion Act with all their vehemence. We have year after year voted for the repeal of it; and to ask us, except upon a case of overwhelming magnitude, to put it into force is simply ridiculous.' What matters the paralysis of the law as compared with the sacred observance of the past utterances of a political party! Mr Birrell prefers the coercion of the mob to the coercion of the law, and in the course he has taken the unprotected citizen has the consolation of knowing that Mr Birrell has the unanimous support of his colleagues in the Cabinet! 6 But Mr Birrell has introduced other novelties into the administration of the law. No 'inciters' to outrage are to be prosecuted. That, says the Attorney-General, 'is a political question'! Let us proceed against the dupes and the corner-boys, but let us not make martyrs of the ringleaders! What a travesty of justice! Would juries in England or anywhere else convict under such circumstances? But the prospect Mr Birrell holds out to the people of Ireland of ever having an effective enforcement of the law is perhaps the most appalling feature in the view he takes of his responsibility towards those whom he is sent to govern. Good government has its duty to perform; and if so be that the Government find it impossible to maintain law and order, if we find crime and murder and outrage on every side, it will be our duty to come to Parliament, or summon it if it is not sitting, to tell it the facts of the case, and prove them before the Irish people, and obtain from Parliament, if they will give them to you, the extra powers which are sought'! Mark that he takes no notice of the failure of the ordinary law, of the disregard by juries of their oaths, of the packing of the bench by certain magistrates,' of the daily triumphs over the law by criminals, of the disorganisation of society that necessarily follows, and of the discouragement of the police, who find their efforts at maintaining order futile and of no avail. One would have thought that the failure of the law showed the necessity of amending it, but no! We must wait for murder and outrage on every side, and then, and then only, does it become the duty of the Executive to make the law effective in Ireland! And yet there never was a time in the history of Ireland when it was more important to preserve that 'tranquillity' which Mr Birrell found upon taking office in Ireland. The credit of the United Kingdom has been pledged to the extent of some 120 millions for the purpose of transferring the land from the owners to the occupiers. That this operation should be carried out speedily and in an atmosphere free from intimidation is obvious. That the owners should be induced to sell freely and at a fair price, unaffected by the terrors of any conspiracy, is but simple justice, and that the occupiers should be taught that in purchasing their holdings they can rely upon a free and uninterrupted use of them to the best advantage is of paramount importance. To the taxpayer who has to find the money an assurance is necessary that the price he pays will bring about peace, enabling the instalments to be earned and repaid without interruption or interference. But what security will there be for any of the parties concerned if a lawless agitation for the partition of other people's property is allowed to flourish and make itself more powerful than the law? For the moment, indeed, as we write, there appears to be a lull in the commission of the offence of cattle driving. Has Mr Birrell made a treaty with the agitators? And what are the terms? These are questions that are being asked on all sides. Has the Government consented to yield to the demands of the law-breakers, and is the economic progress of Ireland once more to be disregarded for the sake of a temporary truce, and with a view to restoring the failing fortunes of a political party and a discredited statesman? Will Radical Governments ever learn that submission to lawlessness, so far from appeasing, only whets the appetite in Ireland? Time will tell. But whatever may be concealed in the womb of the future, those who have watched the operations of the Irish Government during the past year, with the terrible consequences to law-abiding citizens, will feel that Mr Birrell has not, in the words of Mr Bryce, 'seized the precious opportunity.' NOTE. We regret that, in the last number of the Quarterly Review, article VIII, 'The Gardens of Italy,' the name of Miss E. March Phillipps, who wrote the descriptions in the book of that name, illustrated by Mr Charles Latham, was accidentally omitted from the title of the book as given at the head of the article. |