Page images
PDF
EPUB

he had done his best to save the Pope from a blunder which the Holy Father was soon bitterly to repent. Next morning there appeared the Papal letter condemning the Parnell tribute. Great was the jubilation of the enemies of Ireland, but it was shortlived. The bishops and clergy were of course tied hand and foot, in the face of the Papal orders; and although they did not venture to disobey those orders, they did little to conceal their delight when the faithful laity expressed their determination to follow the line of their priests, rather than that of the Pope, by subscribing twice as much to the Parnell tribute as what Dr. Croke had ventured to hope in his most sanguine moments.

The first Home Rule Bill was rejected on the second reading, and the country was handed over to the Tories. For a time there was peace; but the neglect of Parliament to pass a Bill providing for the readjustment of rents in view of the great fall in prices and the failure of the crops, led to renewed agitation, which culminated in the adoption of the Plan of Campaign. The Plan of Campaign was a desperate remedy adopted for a desperate disease. Dr. Croke had not direct part or lot in the adoption of this policy. Archbishop Walsh was supposed to be much more closely concerned in what is now known as Mr. Tim Harrington's plan. But even Archbishop Walsh had little responsibility in the matter. Dr. Croke doubted the policy of the plan, and gravely questioned the advisability of putting it into operation on estates whose owners were wealthy enough to be able to face the loss of the whole of their rent rather than to give in to what they believed to be an unwarrantable demand. Nevertheless, although he did not approve of the plan, he had great sympathy with the campaigners. I was shown in the hall of the Palace of Thurles an old waterproof coat known as the Patriot's, a mantle which Mr. William O'Brien used to wear in the stormy days when he was flitting from estate to estate, avoiding arrest as long as possible.

V. THE FALL OF MR. PARNELL. Still, notwithstanding the storm and stress of Coercion, Dr. Croke continued to hope for the success of the Nationalist cause. Unfortunately, towards the close of the Coercion régime, the cause of Home Rule suffered a damaging eclipse at the hands of its own leader. It is difficult even at this distance to understand the motives which actuated Mr. Parnell in the lunatic moments which preceded his downfall. I say lunatic moments advisedly. Every one knows of the two hours' interview with Mr. Michael Davitt, in which Mr. Parnell, on the very eve of the divorce case, took elaborate pains to convince his old ally and faithful follower that the whole of the case against him was the product of the machinations of the Times, and that the only result of the case would be to inflict a damaging blow upon the enemies of Home Rule-a blow even more damaging than the exposure of the Pigott forgeries.

I learned when I was in Ireland that Mr. Parnell had indulged in similar extraordinary stories at the Palace of Thurles. He stayed two or three days with the Archbishop, and on leaving the hospitable roof of Dr. Croke, he is said to have declared, "I suppose it is very happy in heaven, but as for me, I can wish for no greater happiness than what I have had in these last few days which I have spent with the Archbishop." It was the last time that he was to cross the threshold. He was in excellent spirits, and treated the case as a miserable conspiracy of the Unionists against the cause of Irish Nationality, and laughed to scorn the idea that it could have any other

result than the confounding of his adversaries and the vindication of his own complete innocence. Dr. Croke believed him as implicitly as did Michael Davitt. Thus lulled into false security, the leaders of the Irish nation awaited the result of the trial with composure. Every one knows how it ended, but no one outside of Ireland can realise the absolute dismay and blank amazement with which the decision of the Divorce Court was received in that country.

I remember, as if it were yesterday, in the autumn of 1886 Mr. Tim Harrington abjured me never to breathe a word about Mrs. O'Shea in Ireland. Mr. Harrington's testimony is very striking, because he is not only a Parnellite, but the ablest member of the party-the man who has control of the party organ. But Mr. Tim Harrington as far back as 1886 was under no illusions as to the impossibility of maintaining the unity of the party under the leadership of a co-respondent in a divorce case. I had asked him if there was any truth in the rumours which were even then current as to the relationship which existed between Mr. Parnell and Mrs. O'Shea. "For God's sake," said Mr. Harrington, with great emphasis-" for God's sake don't ever mention that woman's name in Ireland! If ever it should be proved that what we suspect is true, no power on earth can save Parnell. No matter how devoted we may be to him, it will be impossible for him to continue in the leadership of the Irish party. There is nothing,” continued Mr. Harrington, "upon which the bishops and clergy of our Church are more emphatic than in their condemnation of all irregularities in these matters, and we are all so dependent upon the clergy that we could not possibly maintain ourselves against them." That was Mr. Harrington's opinion, deliberately expressed as counsel to me at a time when there seemed no prospect of the scandal ever coming to a head. Such a declaration from such a man helped among other things to leave no manner of doubt on my mind as to what would be the result of the O'Shea divorce.

For a moment Archbishop Croke and the rest of the hierarchy held their breath. After the positive and precise assurances which Mr. Parnell had given them as to the confusion with which he was going to overwhelm the hosts of his traducers, they waited, to quote their own picturesque phrase, believing that he had a stone up his sleeve. Archbishop Croke telegraphed to Mr. Parnell in the vain hope that even at the eleventh hour there might be some explanation or some answer to the reproaches which so flagrant a falsification of all his assurances certainly seemed to demand. But no explanation was forthcoming, and the public was left face to face with the fact that Captain O'Shea had obtained his divorce, and that in the opinion of the judge and jury in the Divorce Court, Mr. Parnell had been proved to have committed adultery with Mrs. O'Shea.

As considerable capital has been attempted to be made out of the relation between the action of Mr. Gladstone and the Irish hierarchy, it may be well to set forth one or two salient facts. The first move which was made was an emphatic declaration of continued allegiance to Mr. Parnell, made at a large meeting in the Leinster Hall, a meeting at which Mr. Tim Healy was one of the leading speakers. It happened, fortunately, that within two or three days of the conclusion of the trial, the Committee of the Irish hierarchy held its usual meeting. this Committee, Dr. Croke brought the case of Mr. Parnell, and proposed that a manifesto should be drawn up and signed by all the Irish bishops and archbishops, declaring that Mr. Parnell was not a fit man to be leader of the Irish

Before

people. This declaration was unanimously accepted by the Committee, and at once sent round the country to all the bishops for the purpose of obtaining their signatures. One bishop alone objected, declaring that he had already pledged himself in the opposite sense; but seeing that he would be left in a minority of one, he capitulated and signed the declaration along with the rest. But a score or more of elderly prelates scattered all over the island could not be communicated with in a moment, and as a result the manifesto was not published until a similar train of causes had forced the hands of Mr. Gladstone. There is very little doubt that immediately following the divorce

gentleman, and hence when the episcopal manifesto appeared with all the signatures attached, it was issued in order of time after Mr. Gladstone's letter. Hence an occasion was given to the Parnellites to say that the Irish bishops had only said amen to Mr. Gladstone, and had danced to the tune of the English piper. This was utterly untrue and cruelly unjust. From the first it was obvious that the Irish bishops, who are responsible for discipline and for the punishment of scandal in their own diocese, could not possibly have acquiesced without a protest in the continuance of Mr. Parnell as the leader of the Irish party. Their manifesto was firm, dignified,

[graphic][ocr errors][subsumed][merged small]

of Mrs. O'Shea, Mr. Gladstone took very much the same view of the situation as was loudly expressed by Mr. Tim Healy at the meeting in Leinster Hall. There was no intention on the part of the Liberal leaders to interfere in the matter. It was not until the Nonconformist conscience began to move very vigorously in this country, and found expression in the press and especially at the Sheffield caucus, that Mr. Gladstone suddenly woke up to the fact that something ought to be done, and as a result we had the famous letter from Hawarden excommunicating Mr. Parnell.

Before Mr. Gladstone's letter was written the declaration drawn up by Archbishop Croke was in circulation throughout the Irish episcopate; but the hierarchy cannot move with the rapidity of a single energetic old

and moderate. If Mr. Parnell had followed his own. instincts, and paid homage to the moral sentiments of his own countrymen, especially those of the Catholic communion, he would inevitably have regained his ascendency over his followers. Nor would his return have been complicated by any of the moral difficulties which have sealed the political fate of Sir Charles Dilke. Unfortunately, however, Mr. Parnell was unable to act upon his own judgment. Under the influence of the woman whom he preferred to his country and his cause, he rejected with indignant scorn the protests of his English allies and of the Irish bishops. At the same time he exposed himself recklessly, disregarded all the laws of health, strained a physique by no means over robust by long journeys and speeches, and in the

endeavour to be hail-fellow-well-met with every corner boy who cared to give him a hand. The Parnell of other days indeed seemed to have departed, leaving a changeling with the features of the Irish leader, but without any of his reserve, his dignity, or his political insight.

This went on for a time, and then came the news of his sudden death. Archbishop Croke heard of it when he was on the Continent, and at first refused to believe it. A telegram removed all doubts, but only to suggest a suspicion, which has deepened in many minds to almost a conviction, that it was not quite in the ordinary course of nature that Mr. Parnell passed away. In these last and bitter days of Mr. Parnell he succeeded in undoing much of the work which had been his crowning glory to have accomplished in his younger days. He had sowed the seeds of strife in the central citadel of national union, and when he passed away he left behind him two embittered factions struggling together within the Home Rule fold and uniting all their energy in order to render impossible the attempt of the more moderate majority to secure union on the basis of a Parliamentary pledge.

VI. HIS OUTLOOK TO-DAY.

With the shattering of the Irish Parliamentary party, Archbishop Croke once more turned away from all active participation in Irish politics. There seemed to him no hope of anything being done for Ireland while Irishmen themselves were so hopelessly disunited. To all suggestions of a modus vivendi between the two extreme wings, ied on the one side by Mr. Healy, and on the other by Mr. Redmond, with a view to union at the coming General Election, he turned a deaf ear. "No," he said, "they will fight until a common enemy appears whom they hate more than they hate each other. Then they will reunite. I have seen it many a time in the old days when faction fights were rife in the land. Bands of two-year-olds and three-year-olds, as they were called, would fight furiously with each other with their blackthorns until the police appeared on the scene, then in a moment the two-yearolds and the three-year-olds would cease belabouring each other and make a firm fighting alliance against the detested police. Who knows but that in the new Unionist administration the Irish faction may not find a substitute for the police, whose advent caused even the ferocious two-year-old and three-year-old factions to unite, if only for a time."

It was in vain that I tried to ronse the Archbishop to a more hopeful estimate of the situation. "Time," he said, "alone will do any good. It is no use fretting, no use striving against the force of circumstances and the self-interest of those who are keeping the fires of faction alight. We must wait. It is deplorable, no doubt, that Irishmen should be wasting their force in internecine strife, instead of rallying round a leader who would fight against the enemies of their country. But the leader has not yet appeared, and the factions will go on fighting. I take little interest in it now," he said, "for I do not see how things are likely to mend in the direction of Home Rule. Look at our situation. The Irish question is at bottom a land question, and the result of the agitation of the last fifteen years has been undoubtedly to give our people a firm grip of their holdings. If the Land Bill could be passed into law, I think you would find that the farmers would have obtained all that they want, and as soon as that point is reached you will find that the farmers, especially the large farmers, will develop a very Conservative sentiment. We can see it already in many parts of the country."

"Looking at Ireland," said I, "as it is to-day and as it was when you were a boy; how do you think it has changed?"

"For the better," said the Archbishop unhesitatingly. "Very much for the better. Education is very much more widely diffused, the people are better clothed, better shod and better fed."

What about drunkenness?"

"If it were not for drunkenness there would be no crime in Ireland at all. As it is, there is no crime which does not arise out of that evil. There is indeed a great deal too much drinking in the country. We are contending against it in every way we can. I will never confirm any boy or girl before they have taken a pledge never to touch any alcoholic drink before twenty-one years of age. But there is a great and wonderful change in the habits of the better-to-do people. The quantity of punch which was drunk fifty years ago or even thirty years ago was enormously greater than that which is drunk to-day. People thought nothing of drinking then to an extent which to-day would be thought quite disgraceful. The improvement which has been wrought among the gentry is spreading to the townspeople, and from them I hope will descend to the mass of the people. As for the number of houses licensed for the sale of drink, that need not concern you. I do not think that the number of licensed houses stands in any relation whatever to the quantity of drink consumed. Our places are very simple; they have no fascinations to lure the people into them, and a man can get drunk in one place as soon as he can in half-adozen."

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

And what about religion?" I asked.

Religion," said the Archbishop, "is the most satisfactory record of all. I do not believe that from the days of St. Patrick down till now has there ever been a time when the Irish people were so devoted to their religion, practising their religion as they are to-day. That is a great comfort in the midst of all adversity and disappointments."

[ocr errors]

How has the character of the people been affected by the troubles of late years?"

"I would not care to say that it has been improved. There has been a development of suspicion, covetousness, and distrust, which was foreign to our people before. This, of course, is by no means universal; but it exists, and is giving rise to grave searchings of heart among many of the clergy."

From this it was an easy transition to discuss the political situation. Lord Houghton had been at Thurles immediately before my visit, and the keen interest and reverent attitude of the late Viceroy was remarked with pleasure. Archbishop Riordan, of San Francisco, talking with one of the priests of the diocese, said that he was much impressed as to what he heard about Lord Houghton, a nobleman of great wealth and leisure, devot. ing himself sedulously to the arduous and somewhat thankless task of Viceroy. Archbishop Riordan frankly declared that he did not know of a similar case in the whole of the United States where one so young, so highly cultured, and so lavishly provided with everything that he could need, should nevertheless devote himself to the cause of his country. An American millionaire is the last man in the world to wear himself out in the service of the State.

Of what is now the late Liberal Administration, Archbishop Croke spoke with friendly respect somewhat dashed with disappointment. There have been three blunders which have somewhat prejudiced the Administration in the eyes of the Irish. These are, I do not

[ocr errors][merged small]

hesitate to tell you, the failure of the Government to repeal the Coercion Act. That was a great mistake. As it is, the Act remains on the statute book, and can be put into effect without calling for a special Parliamentary session. Then there was the difficulty of coming to terms about the Christian Brothers. Why there should have been any difficulty about giving them a State grant I do not know. It was a great misfortune, and has given rise to suspicion and distrust where there was no room for either. Our national system of education in Ireland is very good and satisfactory. The third blunder of the Administration, it seemed to me, was the attitude which it took up in relation to amnesty. This was unfortunate. The Government might have taken up a much more sympathetic attitude in relation

to this question, which would have been very much appreciated in Ireland. On the other hand, the Government has tried to do justice to the people. They tell me- though I do not know anything about it personally-that their new Land Bill is a very satisfactory measure, which, if it had passed, would probably have developed a very Conservative class of farmers."

66 'You do not blame the Government for not overriding the House of Lords?"

"It cannot override the House of Lords," said the Archbishop; "the House of Lords is as much an integral part of the British constitution as the Queen or the House of Commons, and I see no way of getting round it. It was a mistake for the Government to propose to erect a statue from money part of which would have had to have been contributed by Ireland. Do not think for a moment," he added, "that I underestimate the genius of Cromwell. I am just fresh from reading Carlyle's collection of his letters and speeches, and I am full of admiration for the genius of the man, but, of course, as an Irishman, I cannot be expected to be very sympathetic to his memory. If I were an Englishman I should certainly put up a statue to him, but I would not ask Irishmen to contribute to it."

[graphic]

I recalled what Cardinal Manning had said as to Cromwell being the greatest ruler the English had ever had. Dr. Croke heartily concurred. Talking of the anti-English sentiment, he laughed at the idea. He said, "We are all English now; nor is there an Irishman, no matter how vehement he may be, who does not believe that England is the best country in the world."

On the whole I found the Archbishop in a vein of somewhat genial cynicism in relation to politics, of complacent satisfaction in relation to affairs of the Church, and somewhat of an optimist in relation to the material condition of the people. The diminution of their numbers of course filled him with patriotic regret, and he strongly maintained that an Irishman was much better and happier in Ireland than in the United States. The Americanised

Irishmen who come back to the old country are quite a
different sort of men from those who remain. It is only
in Ireland that the Irish characteristics are pre-
served in their native purity, although
he admitted a certain degree of degene-
ration. The physical stature of the
people was diminishing. In the deanery
with which he was first connected there
was not a priest who was under six
feet high. Now the average standard
in the clerical profession is several inches
shorter.

Speaking of his own profession, Arch-
bishop Croke waxed quite enthusiastic
over the ideal position of an Irish parish
priest. He said that he thought the
position of a parish priest in Ireland,
who was comfortably settled at the age
of fifty in the midst of a population where
every one respected him, and there existed
no opposition to his social, spiritual, and
political influence, was unequalled any-
where. "By the age of fifty," said the
Archbishop, "a man has lived through
the temptations of his youth; he has
established ties of respect and reverence with his parish;
he is comfortably housed and well fed, the friend of every
man and the adviser of all."

so ideal in most of the Irish parishes, the relations between the priests and their Archbishop are not less ideal in the diocese of Cashel. The Jubilee, which was

celebrated on July 18th, has been the occasion of bringing out very clearly the intense affection with which Archbishop Croke is regarded by those in the midst of whom he lives, and over whose interests he broods with vigilant care.

I left Thurles with a very pleasant impression of this typical Irish bishop. Genial, sociable, hospitable, one of the old school, anything but a fanatic, he is full of a kindly human tenderness, and a charming affection for the dumb creation, which is one of the most endearing traits of his character. It is possible that many, both Protestants and Catholics, might be disposed to think that they could suggest improvements if they had to create the Archbishop again according to their ideals of what such a man should be in such a place; but take it all in all, there are few who would not agree that it is more than doubtful whether all their pattern prelates would fulfil so well the manifold functions of a post so important as does Dr. Croke, the Archbishop of Cashel.

[graphic]

(From a snapshot.)

If the relations between the people and the priests are

WANTED, A

A SHERLOCK

HOLMES!

JN issuing the sixth thousand of this Detective Story of real life, I would make a special appeal to the friend and

companion of the missing forger to cominunicate with me in some more satisfactory fashion than anonymous letters. According to him, the real forger who is wanted for the crime (the innocent man, Dr. Bynoe, is at the present moment lying in Portland gaol) is far beyond all danger of detection, having even more substantial reasons than his share in this forgery for keeping out of the way. Why then should he not have an interview with me at some place which he could select? I would not betray his confidence; he need not give me his name or his address. If he cared he could conceal his features. All I want him to do is to give me the necessary clues which would enable me to clear up the mystery of how the letters were obtained from the Junior Constitutional Club, and to remove the last shadow of suspicion from the innocent accused.

There is no intention whatever of allowing the matter to drop. An elaborate memorial carefully drawn up by Mr. Blackwall, the barrister, who has taken a great interest in the case, has been prepared for presentation to the Home Office, where we are assured it will receive the most careful consideration from the new Home Secretary.

We are doing our part. But will our mysterious correspondent not do his? I have had three letters from him, but they leave matters very much where they were. He knows everything. His accomplice is out of the way. Why not follow Rose's example, and make a clean breast of everything? If he will but read the book-a copy of which I would gladly send him if he would give me any address-he would see at a glance where his help would be invaluable.

« PreviousContinue »