Welsh Journals

"Labour in Ireland" by James Connolly, with an introduction by Robert Lynd. Maunsel and Company, Ltd., Dublin, 1917. Price 4s. net. Pp. xxxviii., 346. This little book contains the two chief contributions to the socialistic interpretation of Irish History and existing social con- ditions made by James Connolly, who is now well known as the Commandant-General of the Dublin Division of the Republican Army during the Easter Insurrection of 1916. Some of us knew and valued Labour in Irish History long before Connolly attracted general attention by the part he played in the Insurrection, and we welcome a new edition of that remarkable study. Connolly is so often represented as a mere agitator or street-corner orator that we are glad that his Publishers have given all fair- minded men an opportunity of understanding the underlying principles of his propaganda. It is true that he never had the advantage of an educational training and that he was constantly preoccupied with the details of industrial struggles, but the reader of this book will find that he was a man of great mental acumen with a thorough grasp of principles and the ability of presenting conclusions with cogency and force. Labour in Irish History can be placed beside the performances of so-called professed historians without misgiving. The point of view is different, but accepting that for the moment, we challenge anyone to prove that Connolly was incompetent, inconsistent or diffuse. Irish History is notoriously the battle-field for contending parties. No one can pretend that it has ever been presented impartially. There are some who entertain the idea that a well-equipped historian may some day do so. They do not realise that all parties will not agree that the treatment is impartial until they no longer feel acutely about the questions involved. At that distant date Irish History will be the province of specialists as that of Babylon and Ancient Egypt now is. The trouble is that Irish History is still vital, and impartiality in the sense of a narrative which all will accept can only yield a mere chronicle of events signifying nothing. Any historian worthy of the name must adopt a point of view. Irish history has always been written from one or two points of view, either from the native Irish and Catholic point of view, or from the English and Protestant point of view. Given the bias in either direction the treatment of events will necessarily differ. The interest and importance of Connolly's book is that he dis- carded both of these and approached the same facts from a new point of view. His key to History was briefly the Marxian hy- pothesis that through all phases there runs a constant class struggle Religion is subdued to class interests, as Lutheranism was in Germany after the first burst of enthusiasm. The struggle for political reform or change of political institutions is also merely the indication of a deeper class antagonism. In Mr. Connolly's treatment therefore religion falls into the background and political agitation is often muddle-headed, and sometimes a criminal, attempt to confuse the real issue. He would agree with those who believe, or profess to believe, that Ireland is cursed by political propaganda, but he would not go on to advocate a futile policy of laissez faire. If the political agitation yields to anything it must be to a social revolution. It must be admitted that Irish History is peculiarly suited for this interpretation. Since the sixteenth century persistent attempts have been made to alter what may be conceived as the natural cause of development in Ireland. It is not possible here to examine the motives for these attempts in detail. But it is now becoming clear that there is a violent break in continuity and that the readjustment to new conditions has never been effected. Connolly accepts the main thesis of Mrs. J. R. Green's Making of Ireland and its Undoing, e.g., that a Gaelic civilisation was established during the Middle Ages and was destroyed by English policy in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. This Gaelic culture had its own views of land cultivation, views which were diametrically opposed to the English legal conceptions of private property. The conception was elaborated in the Brehon laws and won general acceptance in Ireland. Early in the seventeenth century this system was abrogated and in its place was introduced private ownership on the English model. The older view is that the Irish tribal organisation had degenerated and that its complete abolition was a distinct step forward. The opinions of English observers like Sir John Davis are usually taken at their face value. Consequently, the generally accepted account of Irish medieval history is little more than an uncritical adaptation of Tudor and Stuart writings. Mrs. Green tried to correct this and, whatever may be thought of her treatment of special points, her main thesis stands. The substitution of one system of land tenure for another was largely an effort to aggrandise great landowners. It was repre- sented as an attempt to introduce a higher civilisation and a superior form of Christianity. Connolly could have shewn, had his starting-point been the sixteenth century, that English planters persisted in neglecting to fulfil the conditions of their grants. They were required to settle English labouring families on their estates. They did not do so because, as Payne, one of the Munster under- takers confesses, Irish labour was cheaper. The high-sounding policy of civilising Ireland ran counter to the economic interests of the planters, and consequently it was not pursued. Except in Antrim and Down there was no considerable displace- ment of the native population, and Antrim and Down are not (as is commonly supposed) plantation counties at all. Connolly takes up the subject in the reign of William III. He shews, however, that he fully appreciates the divisions in the Catholic Confederation of Kilkenny earlier in the century. The insur- rection of 1641 had thrown the native Irish and the Catholic gentry of the Pale into alliance. No one has yet shewn in detail that this alliance ruined the cause of the native Irish. The Catholic gentry were so imbued with the English point of view and with a desire to defend their landed interests that the alliance failed to follow the policy which genuine Irish needs demanded. Regarded from this angle the struggle between Jacobite and Williamite in Ireland was mere folly. It was merely a question whether Catholics or Protestants should be the landlords. Neither one party nor the other had any conception of the bettering of the conditions of cultivators of the soil. The defeated Catholics laboured for a generation under the disabilities of the Penal Laws, an attempt to convert Catholic into Protestant landlords, a kind of war after war policy which, as a matter of fact, was not stringently enforced during the period the Acts were on the Statute Book. The real interest of the first part of the eighteenth century is the resistance offered by the peasantry to land monopoly. Historians dismiss Whiteboys, Oakboys, Steelboys and others as mere irritating manifestations of incurable discontent. They can create prejudice by referring to atrocities and mutilations. They never shew a glimmering of a sense that agrarian discon- tent must have deep-rooted causes. All the while the self-seeking of capitalists, whether Protestant or Catholic, was throwing the whole proletariat into opposition. During the War of American Independence matters came to a crisis. The volunteer movement representing a real popular protest against exploitation, was diverted to other ends by bourgeoisie leaders like Gratton and Flood. Connolly always insisted that the cause of democracy in Ireland was one with that of democracy everywhere. He was a good European but also a strong nationalist. In his opinion every nation had something to contribute to the general stock and ought to be free to do so. Throughout the book he is at pains to shew the connection between revolutionary movements in Ireland and on the Continent. The stimulus of the French Revolution is revealed in the agitation of the United Irishmen and the revolu- tion of 1848 gave inspiration to the Young Ireland movement. Reputations of Irish leaders suffer a very considerable reassess-