<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "/dtds/tei/p4x/teicelt.dtd" [
<!ENTITY % TEIbase "TEI.prose">
]>
<TEI.2 id="E900002-004">
<teiHeader creator="Donnchadh &Oacute; Corr&aacute;in" status="update" date.created="1996-12-16" date.updated="2010-04-21">
<fileDesc>
<titleStmt>
<title type="uniform">Labour and Easter Week</title>
<title type="gmd">An electronic edition</title>
<author sortas="connolly, james">James Connolly</author>
<respStmt>
<resp>Electronic edition compiled by</resp>
<name id="DMD">Dara Mac Domhnaill</name>
</respStmt>
<funder>University College Cork</funder>
</titleStmt>
<editionStmt>
<edition n="2">Second draft.</edition>
<respStmt>
<resp>Proof corrections by</resp>
<name>Dara Mac Domhnaill</name>
<name id="DOC">Donnchadh &Oacute; Corr&aacute;in</name>
</respStmt>
</editionStmt>
<extent><measure type="words">47400</measure></extent>
<publicationStmt>
<publisher>CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts: a project of University College Cork.</publisher>
<address>
<addrLine>College Road, Cork, Ireland&mdash;http://www.ucc.ie/celt</addrLine>
</address>
<date>1997</date>
<date>2010</date>
<distributor>CELT online at University College, Cork, Ireland. </distributor>
<idno type="celt">E900002-004</idno>
<availability status="restricted">
<p>Available with prior consent of the CELT programme for purposes of academic research and teaching only.</p>
</availability>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc>
<listBibl>
<head>Editions.</head>
<bibl n="1">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History, Irish Workers
Republic (in monthly instalments)</bibl>
<bibl n="2">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History (Dublin: Maunsel November 1910)</bibl>
<bibl n="3">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History (Dublin: Maunsel 1914). 216pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="4">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History (Dublin: Maunsel 1917). 216pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="5">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History (New York: Donnelly 1919). 137pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="6">James Connolly, Labour in Ireland (Dublin: Maunsell &amp; Roberts 1922), contains Labour in Irish History. 346pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="7">James Connolly, Labour in Ireland (Dublin: Maunsel 1926),
contains Labour in Irish History</bibl>
<bibl n="8">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History (Dublin: Irish Transport &amp; General Workers' Union 1934). 216pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="9">James Connolly, Labour in Ireland (Dublin: Three Candles 1940),
contains Labour in Irish History</bibl>
<bibl n="10">James Connolly, Labour in Ireland (Dublin: Irish Transport &amp; General Workers' Union 1944). Contains Labour in Irish History. 346pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="11">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History, ed. Desmond Ryan,
with an  introduction by William McMullen (Dublin: Three Candles 1951)</bibl>
<bibl n="12">James Connolly, Labour in Irish History (Dublin: New Books Publications 1956; reprinted 1967, 1971, 1973, 1983). 135pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="13">James Connolly, Labour in Ireland (Dublin: C. &Oacute; Lochlainn 1971). Contains Labour in Irish History. 264pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="14">James Connolly  Labour in Irish history (London: Bookmarks
1987). 168pp.</bibl>
<bibl n="15">James Connolly, Collected Works (Dublin: New Books
Publications 1987), i 17-184.</bibl>
</listBibl>
<listBibl>
<head>Translations.</head>
<bibl n="1">Rabochi Klass v Historia Irland (Moscow: Progress Publishers 1968), with an introduction by Artemy D. Kolpakov. Extracts from that introduction are published in English translation in James Connolly, Collected Works (Dublin: New Books Publications 1987), i 508-11.</bibl>
</listBibl>
<listBibl>
<head>Sources, comment on the text, and secondary literature.</head>
<bibl>Kieran Allen, The politics of James Connolly (London: Pluto Press 1990). 206pp.</bibl>
<bibl>William K. Anderson, James Connolly and the Irish left (Dublin: Irish Academic Press 1994). 200pp.</bibl>
<bibl>A bibliography of Irish labour history, Saothar: journal of the Irish Labour History Society 5 (1979). Contains also a Bibliography of works on Irish history published in the USSR and a Bibliography: James Larkin.</bibl>
<bibl>Connolly: the Polish aspects: a review of James Connolly's political and spiritual affinity with J&oacute;zef Pilsudski, leader of the Polish Socialist Party, organiser of the Polish legions and founder of the Polish state (Belfast: Athol 1985). 167pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Fran&ccedil;ois B&eacute;darida, Le socialisme et la nation: James Connolly et l'Irlande (Paris: &Eacute;ditions Ouvri&egrave;res 1965. 31pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Helen Clark, Sing a rebel song: the story of James Connolly, born Edinburgh 1868, executed Dublin 1916 (Edinburgh: City of Edinburgh District Council 1989). 55pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Communist Party of Ireland, Breaking the chains: selected writings of James Connolly on women (Belfast: Unity Press for the Northern Area Women's Committee 1981). 38pp.</bibl>
<bibl>James Connolly and W. Walker, The Connolly-Walker controversy on socialist unity in Ireland (Dublin 1911, repr. Cork: Cork Workers Club 1986)</bibl>
<bibl>Fifty years of Liberty Hall (Dublin: Three Candles 1959)</bibl>
<bibl>James Connolly, Yellow unions in Ireland and other articles (Belfast: Connolly Bookshop 1968)</bibl>
<bibl>Sean Cronin, Young Connolly (Dublin: Repsol 1978, 2nd. ed. 1983</bibl>
<bibl>Noelle Davis, Connolly of Ireland patriot and socialist
(Carnarvon: Swyddfa'r Caernerfon 1946)</bibl>
<bibl>Joseph Deasy, James Connolly: his life and teachings (Dublin: New Books 1966). 14pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Ruth Dudley Edwards, James Connolly (Dublin: Gill &amp; Macmillan 1981). 151pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Peter Berresford Ellis, James Connolly: selected writings edited with an introduction by P. Berresford Ellis (Harmondsworth: Penguin 1973)</bibl>
<bibl>Roger Faligot: James Connolly et le mouvement r&eacute;volutionnaire irlandais (Paris: F. Maspero 1978). 333pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Richard Michael Fox, James Connolly: the forerunner (Tralee: Kerryman Ltd. 1946). 250pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Donnacha N&iacute; Gabhann, The reality of Connolly: 1868-1916 ([Dublin?]: Portlight Press Project 1993). 36pp.</bibl>
<bibl>C. Desmond Greaves, The life and times of James Connolly (London:
Lawrence &amp; Wishart 1961). Also Berlin: Seven Seas Publishers 1976.</bibl>
<bibl>Andy Johnston, James Larraggy, Edward McWilliams, Connolly: a Marxist
analysis (Dublin: Irish Workers Group 1990)</bibl>
<bibl>Brian Kelly, James Connolly and the fight for an Irish Workers' Republic (Cleveland, OH: Hera Press 1982). 23pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Patrick Anthony Lake, James Connolly: the development of his political ideology (unpubl. Thesis 1984)</bibl>
<bibl>Samuel Levenson, James Connolly: a biography (London: Brian &amp; O'Keeffe 1973)</bibl>
<bibl>Robert Lynd, James Connolly: an appreciation, to James Connolly,
Collected works (2 vols Dublin: New Books Publications 1987), i, 495-507 (first published October 1916)</bibl>
<bibl>Proinsias Mac an Bheatha, James Connolly and the Worker's Republic (Dublin: Foilseach&aacute;in N&aacute;isi&uacute;ta Teo. 1978). 90pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Lambert McKenna and Thomas J. Morrissey, The social teachings of James Connolly, by Lambert McKenna, ed Thomas J. Morrissey (Dublin: Veritas Dublin 1991)</bibl>
<bibl>Proinsias Mac Aonghusa, What Connolly said: James Connolly's writings (Dublin: New Island Books 1994). 94pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Derry Kelleher, Quotations from James Connolly: an anthology in three parts ([Drogheda]: Vanguard Publications 1972). 2 vols.</bibl>
<bibl>Lambert McKenna, The social teachings of James Connolly (Dublin: Catholic Truth Society 1920).</bibl>
<bibl>Peter McKevitt, James Connolly (Dublin: Catholic Truth Society 1969). 15pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Priscilla Metscher, Republicanism and socialism in Ireland:
a study of the relationship of politics and ideology from the United Irishmen to James Connolly, Bremer Beitr&auml;ge zur Literatur- und
Ideologiegeschichte 2 (Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang 1986)</bibl>
<bibl>Austen Morgan, James Connolly: a political biography (Manchester: Manchester U.P. 1988). 244pp.</bibl>
<bibl>John F. Murphy, Implications of the Irish past: the socialist ideology of James Connolly from an historical perspective (Unpublished MA thesis, University of North Carolina at Charlotte 1983).</bibl>
<bibl>Michael O'Riordan, General introduction, to James Connolly,
Collected works (2 vols Dublin: New Books Publications 1987), i,
pages ix-xvii</bibl>
<bibl>Cathal O'Shannon, Introduction, to James Connolly, Collected works (2 vols Dublin: New Books Publications 1987), i, 11-16</bibl>
<bibl>Bernard Ransom, Connolly's Marxism (London: Pluto Press 1980)</bibl>
<bibl>Carl Reeve and Ann Barton Reeve, James Connolly and the United States: the road to the 1916 Irish rebellion (Atlantic Highlands NJ: Humanities Press 1978). 307pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Desmond Ryan, James Connolly: his life, work &amp; writings (Dublin: Talbot Press 1924)</bibl>
<bibl>Desmond Ryan, Socialism and nationalism: a selection from the writings of James Connolly (Dublin: Sign of the Three Candles 1948). 211pp.</bibl>
<bibl>Desmond Ryan, James Connolly, in J. W. Boyle (ed), Leaders and workers
(Cork: Mercier Press 1960, repr. 1978)</bibl>
<bibl>Frederick Ryan, Socialism, democracy and the Church ([Dublin]: Labour History Workshop 1984). With reviews of Connolly's 'Labour in Irish History' and Jaures' 'Studies in socialism'. 69p.</bibl>
<bibl>G. Sch&uuml;ller, James Connolly and Irish freedom: a marxist analysis (Cork: Cork Workers Club 1974, reprint of a work first published Chicago 1926). 30pp.</bibl>
<bibl>E. Strauss, Irish nationalism and British democracy (Westport CT: Greenwood 1975)</bibl>
<bibl>X. T. Zagladina, James Connolly [in Russian] (Moscow: Mysl Publishing House 1985)</bibl>
</listBibl>
<listBibl>
<head>The edition used in the digital edition</head>
<biblStruct>
<analytic>
<author sortas="connolly, james">James Connolly</author>
<title level="a">Labour and Easter Week</title>
</analytic>
<monogr>
<title level="m">Collected works</title>
<editor id="DR">Desmond Ryan</editor>
<imprint>
<publisher>New Books Publications</publisher>
<pubPlace>Dublin</pubPlace>
<biblScope type="volume">2</biblScope>
<date>1987</date>
<biblScope type="page">25&ndash;178</biblScope>
</imprint>
</monogr>
</biblStruct>
</listBibl>
</sourceDesc>
</fileDesc>
<encodingDesc>
<projectDesc>
<p>CELT: Corpus of Electronic Texts</p>
</projectDesc>
<samplingDecl>
<p>Editorial introduction and other preliminary materials not by Connolly have been omitted. The text represents the printed text, but obvious errors have been corrected and marked as corrected.</p>
</samplingDecl>
<editorialDecl>
<correction status="high">
<p>Text has been thoroughly checked, proof-read and parsed using NSGMLS.</p>
</correction>
<normalization>
<p>The electronic text represents the published text. Titles, such as those of newspapers are tagged <emph>TITLE</emph>.</p>
</normalization>
<quotation>
<p>Reported speech and very short quotations are rendered <emph>Q</emph>;  lengthy passages from other authors are embedded as texts.</p>
</quotation>
<hyphenation>
<p>The practice of the printed text. Soft hyphens are silently removed. Where a hyphenated word crosses a page boundary the word is completed before marking the page boundary.</p>
</hyphenation>
<segmentation>
<p><emph>DIV0</emph>=the whole work; <emph>DIV1</emph>=individual articles. Metrical lines and stanzas are marked.</p>
</segmentation>
<interpretation>
<p>Only structural mark-up. Names of persons (given names), and places are not tagged. Terms for cultural and social roles are not tagged. Titles of
books and newspapers are tagged; dates are tagged.</p>
</interpretation>
</editorialDecl>
<refsDecl>
<state rend="headed" gi="div1" freq="1" label="Chapter" unit="Chapter"/>
</refsDecl>
</encodingDesc>
<profileDesc>
<creation>By James Connolly (1897-1916)
<dateRange from="1898" to="1916" exact="both">1898-1916</dateRange></creation>
<langUsage> 
<language id="en">The text is in English.</language>
</langUsage>
<textClass>
<keywords>
<term>political</term>
<term>tract</term>
<term>prose</term>
<term>20c</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
<revisionDesc>
<change>
<date>2010-04-21</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Beatrix F&auml;rber</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Conversion script run; header updated; new wordcount made; file parsed.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>2008-08-28</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Beatrix F&auml;rber</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>File validated.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>2008-07-30</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Ruth Murphy</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Keywords added.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>2005-08-25</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Julianne Nyhan</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Normalised language codes and edited langUsage for XML conversion</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>2005-08-04T14:33:13+0100</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Peter Flynn</name>
<resp>conversion</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Converted to XML</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>1997-12-10</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Margaret Lantry</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Header re-structured; text parsed using NSGMLS; mark-up normalized using SGMLNORM.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>1997-12-01</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Floor Hondelink</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Structural mark-up checked.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>1996-12-17</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Mavis Cournane</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Text parsed using SGMLS.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>1996-12-16</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Donnchadh &Oacute; Corr&aacute;in</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Header constructed, structural mark-up checked and revised.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>1996-05-24</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Dara Mac Domhnaill</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Text proofed, edited and structural mark-up entered.</item>
</change>
<change>
<date>1995-1996</date>
<respStmt>
<name>Se&aacute;n Harrington and Dara Mac Domhnaill</name>
<resp>ed.</resp>
</respStmt>
<item>Data capture by scanning at the Department of History, University
College Cork.</item>
</change>
</revisionDesc>
</teiHeader>
<text n="E900002-004">
<front>
<titlePage>
<docTitle>
<titlePart type="main">LABOUR AND EASTER WEEK</titlePart>
<titlePart type="ALT">A selection from the writings of JAMES CONNOLLY</titlePart>
</docTitle>
</titlePage>
<cecinit>
<p><emph>We went out to break the connection between this country and the British Empire and to establish an Irish Republic. We believed that the call we then issued to the people of Ireland, was a nobler call in a holier cause
than any call issued to them &hellip;</emph></p>
</cecinit>
</front>
<body>
<div0 type="pol-tract" lang="en">
<pb n="25"/>
<div1 n="1" type="article">
<head>The Roots of modern War</head>
<p>The Cabinets who rule the destinies of nations from the various capitals of Europe are but the tools of the moneyed interest. Their quarrels are not dictated by sentiments of national pride or honour, but by the avarice and
lust of power on the part of the class to which they belong. The people
who fight under their banners in the various armies or navies do indeed
imagine they are fighting the battles of their country, but in what
country has it ever happened that the people have profited by foreign
conquest?</p>
<p>The influence which impels towards war to-day is the influence of capitalism. Every war now is a capitalist move for new markets, and it is a move capitalism must make or perish. The mad scramble for wealth which this century has witnessed, has resulted in lifting almost every European country into the circle of competition for trade. New machinery, new inventions, new discoveries in the scientific world have all been laid under contribution as aids to industry, until the wealth producing powers of society at large have far outstripped the demand for goods, and now those very powers we have
conjured up from the bosom of nature threaten to turn and rend us&hellip;. Every new labour-saving machine at one and the same
time, by reducing the number of workers needed, reduces the demand for
goods which the worker cannot buy, while increasing the power of
producing goods, and thus permanently increases the number of
unemployed, and shortens the period of industrial prosperity.
Competition between capitalists drives them to seek for newer and more
efficient wealth-producing machines, but as the home market is now no
longer able to dispose of their produce they are driven to foreign
markets&hellip;. So it is in China to-day. The great
industrial nations of the world <pb n="26"/> driven on by their
respective moneyed classes, themselves driven on by their own machinery,
now front each other in the far East, and, with swords in hand, threaten
to set the armed millions of Europe in terrible and bloody conflict, in
order to decide which shall have the right to force upon John Chinaman
the goods which his European brother produces, but may not enjoy.
Laveleye says somewhere that capitalism came into the world covered with
blood and tears and dirt. We might add that if this war cloud now
gathering in the East, does burst, as it will be the last capitalist
war, so the death of that baneful institution will be like its birth,
bloody, muddy and ignominious.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR"><p>Emile de Laveleye, (1822-1892), Belgian publicist,
economist, and critic of socialism.</p></note></p>
<bibl><title type="book">Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1898-08-20">August 20, 1898</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="27"/>
<div1 n="2" type="article">
<head>The South African War (1899-1902)</head>
<div2 n="1" type="section">
<p>At
the time of going to press it seems probable that in a few weeks at most
the British Government will have declared war against the South African
Republic. Ostensibly in pursuance of a chivalrous desire to obtain
political concessions in their adopted country for British citizens
anxious to renounce their citizenship, but in reality for the purpose of
enabling an unscrupulous gang of capitalists to get into their hands the
immense riches of the diamond fields. Such a war will undoubtedly take
rank as one of the most iniquitous wars of the century. Waged by a
mighty empire against a nation entirely incapable of replying in any
effective manner, by a government of financiers upon a nation of
farmers, by a nation of filibusterers upon a nation of workers, by a
capitalist ring, who will never see a shot fired during the war, upon a
people defending their homes and liberties&mdash;such is the war upon
which the people of England are criminally or stupidly, and criminally
even if stupidly, allowing their government to enter. No better
corroboration of the truth of the socialist maxim that the modern state
is but a committee of rich men administering public affairs in the
interest of the upper class, has been afforded of late years, than is
furnished by this spectacle of a gang of South African speculators
setting in motion the whole machinery of the British Empire in
furtherance of their own private ends. There is no pretence that the war
will benefit the English people, yet it is calmly assumed the people
will pay for the war, and, if necessary, fight in it.</p>
<p>It must be
admitted that the English people are at present doing their utmost to
justify the low estimate in which their <pb n="28"/> rulers hold them; a
people who for centuries have never heard a shot fired in anger upon
their shores, yet who encourage their government in its campaign of
robbery and murder against an unoffending nation; a people, who, secure
in their own homes, permit their rulers to carry devastation and death
into the homes of another people, assuredly deserve little respect no
matter how loudly they may boast of their liberty-loving spirit.</p>
<p>For the Irish worker the war will contain some valuable lessons. In
the first place it will serve to furnish a commentary upon the hopes of
those in our ranks who are so fond of dilating upon the <q>peaceful</q> realisation of the aims of socialism. We do
not like to theorise upon the function of force as a midwife to
progress&mdash;that, as we have ere now pointed out, is a matter to be
settled by the enemies of progress&mdash;but we cannot afford to remain
blind to the signs of the time. If, then, we see a small section of the
possessing class prepared to launch two nations into war, to shed oceans
of blood and spend millions of treasure, in order to maintain intact a
<emph>small portion</emph> of their privileges, how can we
expect the entire propertied class to abstain from using the same
weapons, and to submit peacefully when called upon to <emph>yield up for ever all their privileges</emph>? Let the
working class democracy of Ireland note that lesson, and, whilst working
peacefully while they may, keep constantly before their minds the truth
that the capitalist class is a beast of prey, and cannot be moralised,
converted, or conciliated but must be extirpated.</p>
<p>One other
lesson is, that Ireland is apparently a negligible factor in the
calculations of the Imperial Government. In certain <q>advanced</q> circles we hear much about the important
position of Ireland in international politics. The exact value of such
talk may be gauged by the fact that troops are being taken from Ireland
to be sent to the Transvaal. The British Government has no fears on the
score of Ireland; the Home <pb n="29"/> Rule Party, and their good
friends the Constabulary, may be trusted to keep this country quiet. But
if the working class of Ireland were only united and understood their
power sufficiently well, and had shaken off their backs the Home
Rule-Unionist twin brethren&mdash;keeping us apart that their class may
rob us&mdash; they would see in this complication a chance for making a
long step forward towards better conditions of life&mdash;and, seeing
it, act upon it in a manner that would ensure the absence from the
Transvaal of a considerable portion of the British army. The
class-conscious workers who chafe under our present impotence, and long
to remove it, will find the path pointed out to them in the ranks of the
Irish Socialist Republican Party.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1899-08-19">August 19, 1899</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
<div2 n="2" type="section">
<p>&hellip;. And what about the war? Well, I think it is the
beginning of the end. This great, blustering British Empire; this Empire
of truculent bullies, is rushing headlong to its doom. Whether they
ultimately win or lose, the Boers have pricked the bubble of England's
fighting reputation. The world knows her weakness now. Have at her,
then everywhere and always and in every manner. And before the first
decade of the coming century will close, you and I, if we survive, will
be able to repeat to our children the tale of how this monstrous tyranny
sank in dishonour and disaster.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1899-11-18">November 18, 1899</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
<pb n="30"/>
<div2 n="3" type="section">
<head>Resolution drafted by James Connolly and adopted at a Public Meeting to express
Sympathy with the Boer Republics, held in Foster Place, Dublin on <date value="1899-08-27">August 27th, 1899</date></head>
<p>WHEREAS the
government of this country is maintained upon the bayonets of an
occupying army against the will of the people;</p>
<p>WHEREAS there were
in India, Egypt and other portions of the British Empire other and much
larger populations also kept down in forced subjection;</p>
<p>WHEREAS a
country that thus keeps down subject populations by the use of the
hangman, the bullet or the sword, has no right to preach to another
about its duties towards its population; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that
this meeting denounces the interference of the British capitalist
government in the internal affairs of the Transvaal Republic as an act
of criminal aggression, wishes long life to the Republic, and trusts
that our fellow-countrymen will, if need be, take up arms in defence of
their adopted country.<note n="1" type="end" resp="auth">This meeting was held by the
Irish Socialist Republican Party, and was their first public meeting
held in Ireland to express sympathy with the Boers.</note></p>
</div2>
<div2 n="4" type="section">
<head>A Great Opportunity</head>
<p>The British Army is getting its hands full in South Africa. The defeated,
demoralised, disheartened, subjugated, routed, dispersed, conquered,
disarmed and humiliated Boers are still <pb n="31"/> toppling over
British battalions, capturing British convoys, cutting British lines of
communication, and keeping Lord Roberts and all his generals in a state
of almighty panic and unrest, and not a single soldier can be spared
from South Africa for a long time to come.</p>
<p>The Boxers in China
have developed a sudden aptitude for war, are prowling around on the
hunt for foreign devils, and with a smile that is child-like and bland
are offering to box all Europe, with Japan and America thrown in as
appetisers. Great Britain is in want of soldiers there also.</p>
<p>Now
it only wants a native rising in India, and then would come our Irish
opportunity.</p>
<p>With war in Africa, war in China, war in India, we
of the unconquered Celtic race would rise up in our millions from Malin
Head to Cape Clear, from Dublin to Galway, and&mdash;and well, pass <q>strong</q> resolutions, and then go home and pray that
somebody else may beat the Sasanach.</p>
<p>The Boers are invulnerable
on kopjes, the Boxers are death on missionaries, but we are irresistible
on <q>resolutions</q>.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1900-06-30">June 30, 1900</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
</div1>
<pb n="32"/>
<div1 n="3" type="article">
<head>British and Russian Imperialism</head>
<div2 n="1" type="section">
<p>His Imperial Highness, the Czar of All the Russias, has issued a
manifesto in favour of universal disarmament. This is the silly
season&hellip;. His rule is founded on the sword, and can
only be maintained by the sword, and whatever seriousness there is in
his latest pronouncement may be translated into an appeal to his
brother despots throughout Europe to cease warring with each other in
order that their hands may be free to throttle the infant liberty in
their own dominions. Humanitarians indeed! Will Russia withdraw her
troops from Warsaw and depend only on the loyalty and affection of the
Poles&hellip;? The Czar, we repeat is having his little
joke. He speaks to-day of universal peace, in order that when, in the
near future, he hurls his armies across the frontier into China, India
or Constantinople, or whelms in blood the aspirations for freedom on the
part of his own subjects, he may be able to point to this action of his
as proof that the battle was not of his seeking. From the Cabinets of
every European Government all the other conspirators against the freedom
of the human race echo his cry, and even while they are ordering new
armaments and equipping new fleets, protest the intensity of their
desire for peace. 'Twas ever thus&hellip;. But universal
disarmament is not a dream. The day will come, and perhaps like a bolt
from the blue when the frontiers&hellip;will not be
sufficient to prevent the handclasp of friendship between the peoples.
But that day will come only when the kings and kaisers, queens and
czars, financiers and capitalists who now oppress humanity will be
hurled from their place and power, and the emancipated workers of the
earth, no longer the blind instruments of rich men's greed will found a
new society, a new civilisation, <pb n="33"/> whose corner stone will be
labour, whose inspiring principle will be justice, whose limits humanity
alone can bound.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic<corr resp="DMD" sic="">,</corr></title> <date value="1898-09-03">September 3, 1898</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
<div2 n="2" type="section">
<p>When the Russian disarmament proposals were first mooted we, alone
among Irish journalists, characterised them as dishonest and the chorus
of praise they elicited throughout Europe as hypocritical. One short
week has sufficed to prove the truth of our contention&hellip;. There is scarcely a capital in Europe from which
Great Britain has not been complimented on the successful outcome of the
battle before Khartoum; complimented by the very men (and newspapers)
who a week ago were ostentatiously singing anthems of brotherly love
with all men, and deploring the cruel necessity of war&hellip;. The British occupation of Egypt, from the
bombardment of Alexandria down to this latest massacre at Omdurman has
been one prolonged criminal enterprise, conceived and executed entirely
in the interests of the holders of Egyptian bonds and speculating
capitalists.<note n="1" type="end" resp="auth"><q>India is regarded by its alien rulers as a
huge human cattle farm to be worked solely in the interest of the
dominant nation. Whatever is done for its vast internal resources, is
done for the benefit of the Indian people, but primarily with a view to
the dividends which the investing classes of England may draw from such
development</q>. <bibl><title>Limerick
Leader</title>, <date value="1897-07">July, 1897</date>.</bibl></note> The enemy, as our Irish
newspapers call them, fought for home and freedom; the British carried
fire and sword and desolation into a land and upon a people who had
never injured them, a people who could not have disturbed their
conquest, even of lower Egypt, had they been ever so willing. But
Britain has triumphed. Glorious triumph!</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1898-09-10">September 10, 1898</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
</div1>
<pb n="34"/>
<div1 n="4" type="article">
<head>Socialism and Imperialism</head>
<p>As socialists&mdash;and
therefore anxious at all times to throw the full weight of whatever
influence we possess upon the side of the forces making most directly
for socialism&mdash;we have often been somewhat disturbed in our mind by
observing in the writings and speeches of some of our foreign comrades a
tendency to discriminate in favour of Great Britain in all the
international complications in which that country may be involved over
questions of territorial annexation, spheres of influence, etc., in
barbarous or semi-civilised portions of the globe. We are, we repeat,
disturbed in our mind because we ourselves do not at all sympathise with
this pro-British policy, but, on the contrary, would welcome the
humiliation of the British arms in any one of the conflicts in which it
is at present engaged, or with which it has been lately menaced. This we
freely avow. But the question then arises: is this hostility to the
British Empire due to the fact of our national and racial subjection by
that Power, or is it consistent with the doctrines we hold as adherents
of the Marxist propaganda, and believers in the Marxist economics?</p>
<p>&hellip;The English socialists are apparently divided
over the question of the war on the Transvaal; one section of the Social
Democratic Federation going strongly for the Boers and against the war;
another also declaring against the war, but equally denouncing the
Boers; and finally, one English socialist leader Mr. Robert
Blatchford<note type="end" resp="DR">Robert Blatchford, 1851-1843, editor of the
Socialist weekly, <title>Clarion</title>, and advocate of British war preparedness against Germany. His popular
pamphlet, <title>Merrie England</title>, published in 1894 sold over a million copies. In his autobiography, <title>My Eighty Years</title>, (London, 1931),
Blatchford wrote that during the Boer war, <q>nearly all the Socialists
and Labour people declared themselves pro-Boer and I remained
pro-British</q>.</note>, editor of <title>The Clarion</title> and author of <title>Merrie
England</title>, coming out bluntly for the war and toasting the
health of the Queen, and the success of the British arms. On the other
hand, all the journals of the party on the continent of Europe and in
America, as far as we are aware, come out in this instance
wholeheartedly on the side of the Transvaal <pb n="35"/> and against what
the organ of our Austrian comrades fittingly terms England's act of
<q>blood-thirsty piracy</q>&hellip;. Our esteemed comrade, H. M. Hyndman<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">H. M. Hyndman, (1842-1921), English
Socialist leader wrote of Connolly after 1916: <q>Though
Connolly had long gone out of our own movement (sic), he did thorough
good service while he was with us, and was unquestionably an honest,
determined and capable enthusiast with brains&hellip;.
But he had lashed himself up to the conviction that unorganised force
could hasten on economic and social growth.</q> (<title>Last Years of H. M. Hyndman</title>,
p. 125). John Leslie and others of Connolly's old friends in the
Social Democratic Federation shared this opinion. Connolly's opinion of
Hyndman may be given: <q>As an exponent of socialist
economics Hyndman has no more ardent <pb n="37"/> admirer than the
writer, but we contend that as a political guide his whole career has
been one long series of blunders; a fact which explains, as nothing else
can explain, the wobbling state of the movement in England. The keynote
of his character has been to preach revolution and to practise
compromise, and to do neither thoroughly.</q> <bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1903-04">April,
1913</date>.</bibl></note>&hellip;took the position that England
ought not to have given way to Russia at Port Arthur, but ought to have
fought her and asserted British supremacy in the Far East. His reason
for so contending being the greater freedom enjoyed under British than
under Russian rule&hellip;</p>
<p>&hellip;. That we may not be accused of criticising the
attitude of others without stating our own, we hereby place on record
our position on all questions of international policy: <text>
<body>
<p>Scientific revolutionary socialism teaches us that socialism can only
be realised when capitalism has reached its zenith of development; that
consequently the advance of nations industrially undeveloped into the
capitalistic stage of industry is a thing highly to be desired, since
such an advance will breed a revolutionary proletariat in such countries
and force forward there the political freedom necessary for the speedy
success of the socialist movement; and finally, that as colonial
expansion and the conquest of new markets are necessary for the
prolongation of the life of capitalism, the prevention of colonial
expansion and the loss of markets to countries capitalistically
developed, such as England, precipitates economic crises there, and so
gives an impulse to revolutionary thought and helps to shorten the
period required to develop backward countries and thus prepare the
economic conditions needed for our triumph&hellip;.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<p>Comrade Hyndman claims that we should oppose
Russia because her people are ruled despotically, and favour England
because her people are politically free. But that is the reasoning of a
political radical, not the dispassionate analysis of contemporary
history we have a right to expect from an economist and a socialist of
Hyndman's reputation&hellip;. Russia is not yet a
capitalist country, therefore her people bow beneath the yoke of an
autocrat&hellip;. Drive the Russian out of Poland! <pb n="36"/> By all means! Prevent his extension towards Europe! Certainly!
But favour his extension and his acquisition of new markets in Asia (at
the expense of England if need be) if you would see capitalism hurry
forward to its death.</p>
<p>It may be argued that our Irish nationality
plays a large part in forming this conception of international politics.
We do not plead guilty, but even if it were so the objection would be
puerile. As socialists we base our political policy on the class
struggle of the workers, because we know that the self interest of the
workers lies our way. That the self-interest may sometimes be base does
not affect the correctness of our position. The mere fact that the
inherited (and often unreasoning) anti-British sentiment of a chauvinist
Irish patriot impels him to the same conclusion as we arrived at as the
result of our economic studies does not cause us to shrink from
proclaiming our position. It rather leads us to rejoice that our
propaganda is thus made all the easier by this none too common identity
of aim established as a consequence of what we esteem the strong and
irreconcilable hostility between English imperialism and socialism.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1899-11-04">November 4, 1899</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="38"/>
<div1 n="5" type="article">
<head>A Continental Revolution</head>
<p>The outbreak of war on
the continent of Europe makes it impossible this week to write to <title>Forward</title> upon any other question. I
have no doubt that to most of my readers Ireland has ere now ceased to
be, in colloquial phraseology, the most important place on the map, and
that their thoughts are turning gravely to a consideration of the
position of the European socialist movement in the face of this
crisis.</p>
<p>Judging by developments up to the time of writing, such
considerations must fall far short of affording satisfying reflections
to the socialist thinker. For, what is the position of the socialist
movement in Europe to-day? Summed up briefly it is as follows:</p>
<p>For a generation at least the socialist movement in all the countries
now involved has progressed by leaps and bounds, and more satisfactory
still, by steady and continuous increase and development.</p>
<p>The
number of votes recorded for socialist candidates has increased at a
phenomenally rapid rate, the number of socialist representatives in all
legislative chambers has become more and more of a disturbing factor
in the calculations of governments. Newspapers, magazines, pamphlets
and literature of all kinds teaching socialist ideas have been and are
daily distributed by the million amongst the masses; every army and navy
in Europe has seen a constantly increasing proportion of socialists
amongst its soldiers and sailors, and the industrial organisations of
the working class have more and more perfected their grasp over the
economic machinery of society, and more and more moved responsive to the
socialist conception of their duties. Along with this, hatred of
militarism has spread through every rank of society, making everywhere
its recruits, and <pb n="39"/> raising an aversion to war even amongst
those who in other things accepted the capitalist order of things.
Anti-militarist societies and anti-militarist campaigns of socialist
societies and parties, and anti-militarist resolutions of socialist and
international trade union conferences have become part of the order of
the day and are no longer phenomena to be wondered at. The whole working
class movement stands committed to war upon war&mdash;stands so com-
mitted at the very height of its strength and influence.</p>
<p>And now,
like the proverbial bolt from the blue, war is upon us, and war between
the most important, because the most socialist, nations of the earth.
And we are helpless!!</p>
<p>What then becomes of all our resolutions;
all our protests of fraternisation; all our threats of general
strikes; all our carefully-built machinery of internationalism; all our
hopes for the future? Were they all as sound and fury, signifying
nothing? When the German artilleryman, a socialist serving in the German
army of invasion, sends a shell into the ranks of the French army,
blowing off their heads; tearing out their bowels, and mangling the
limbs of dozens of socialist comrades in that force, will the fact that
he, before leaving for the front, <q>demonstrated</q>
against the war be of any value to the widows and orphans made by the
shell he sent upon its mission of murder? Or, when the French rifleman
pours his murderous rifle fire into the ranks of the German line of
attack, will he be able to derive any comfort from the probability that
his bullets are murdering or maiming comrades who last year joined in
thundering <q>hochs</q> and cheers of greeting to the
eloquent Jaur&egrave;s, when in Berlin he pleaded for international
solidarity? When the socialist pressed into the army of the Austrian
Kaiser, sticks a long, cruel bayonet-knife into the stomach of the
socialist conscript in the army of the Russian Czar, and gives it a
twist so that when pulled out it will pull the entrails out along with
it, will the terrible act lose any of <pb n="40"/> its fiendish cruelty
by the fact of their common theoretical adhesion to an anti-war
propaganda in times of peace? When the socialist soldier from the Baltic
provinces of Russia is sent forward into Prussian Poland to bombard
towns and villages until a red trail of blood and fire covers the homes
of the unwilling Polish subjects of Prussia, as he gazes upon the
corpses of those he has slaughtered and the homes he has destroyed, will
he in his turn be comforted by the thought that the Czar whom he
serves sent other soldiers a few years ago to carry the same devastation
and murder into his own home by the Baltic Sea?</p>
<p>But why go on? Is
<corr resp="DMD" sic="is">it</corr> not as clear as the fact of life
itself that no insurrection of the working class; no general strike; no
general uprising of the forces of Labour in Europe, could possibly carry
with it, or entail a greater slaughter of socialists, than will their
participation as soldiers in the campaigns of the armies of their
respective countries? Every shell which explodes in the midst of a
German battalion will slaughter some socialists; every Austrian cavalry
charge will leave the gashed and hacked bodies of Serbian or Russian
socialists squirming and twisting in agony upon the ground; every
Russian, Austrian, or German ship sent to the bottom or blown sky-high
will mean sorrow and mourning in the homes of some socialist comrades of
ours. If these men must die, would it not be better to die in their own
country fighting for freedom for their class, and for the abolition of
war, than to go forth to strange countries and die slaughtering and
slaughtered by their brothers that tyrants and profiteers might
live?</p>
<p>Civilisation is being destroyed before our eves; the
results of generations of propaganda and patient heroic plodding and
self-sacrifice are being blown into annihilation from a hundred cannon
mouths; thousands of comrades with whose souls we have lived in
fraternal communion are about to be done to death; they whose one hope
it was to be spared to co-operate <pb n="41"/> in building the perfect
society of the future are being driven to fratricidal slaughter in
shambles where that hope will be buried under a sea of blood.</p>
<p>I
am not writing in captious criticism of my continental comrades. We know
too little about what is happening on the continent, and events have
moved too quickly for any of us to be in a position to criticise at all.
But believing as I do that any action would be justified which would put
a stop to this colossal crime now being perpetrated, I feel compelled to
express the hope that ere long we may read of the paralysing of the
internal transport service on the continent, even should the act of
paralysing necessitate the erection of socialist barricades and acts of
rioting by socialist soldiers and sailors, as happened in Russia in
1905. Even an unsuccessful attempt at social revolution by force of
arms, following the paralysis of the economic life of militarism,
would be less disastrous to the socialist cause than the act of
socialists allowing themselves to be used in the slaughter of their
brothers in the cause.<note n="1" type="end" resp="auth"><q>But what is the price of
war&mdash;the price as it must be paid by a nation? That all the young
and vigorous men go out to be killed, and all the unfit and diseased
stay at home to be fathers of the next generation&hellip;. There are streets in Dublin, in its poorer quarters,
where every family has lost a man; there are sections in the country
where the toll of death has been so heavy that every man has gone&hellip;. Upon the top of this sacrifice of the living comes
the borrowing of money to continue the work of hell, and this borrowing
means pawning the labour and genius of the future to the financial
leeches and usurious money-lenders of Europe and America&hellip;. The peoples of Europe have held back from violence
because bloodshed and armed strife had grown repulsive as a result of
socialist propaganda. The war madness has swept away that humanitarian
feeling and revealed our rulers as what they are&mdash;monsters, red in
tooth and claw. Yes, revolution is no longer unthinkable in Europe, its
shadow already looms upon the horizon</q>. <bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-10-16">October 16, 1915</date>.</bibl></note></p>
<p>A great continental
uprising of the working class would stop the war; a universal protest at
public meetings will not save a single life from being wantonly
slaughtered.</p>
<p>I make no war upon patriotism; never have done. But
against the patriotism of capitalism&mdash;the patriotism which makes
the interest of the capitalist class the supreme test of duty and
right&mdash;I place the patriotism of the working class, the patriotism
which judges every public act by its effect upon the fortunes of those
who toil. That which is good for the working class I esteem patriotic,
but that party or movement is the most perfect embodiment of patriotism
which most successfully works for the conquest by the working class of
the control of the destinies of the land wherein they labour.</p>
<p>To
me, therefore, the socialist of another country is a fellow-patriot, as
the capitalist of my own country is a natural enemy. I regard each
nation as the possessor of a definite contribution <pb n="42"/> to the
common stock of civilisation, and I regard the capitalist class of each
nation as being the logical and natural enemy of the national culture
which constitutes that definite contribution.</p>
<p>Therefore, the
stronger I am in my a section for national tradition, literature,
language, and sympathies, the more firmly rooted I am in my opposition
to that capitalist class which in its soulless lust for power and gold
would bray the nations as in a mortar.</p>
<p>Reasoning from such
premises, therefore, this war appears to me as the most fearful crime of
the centuries. In it the working class are to be sacrificed that a small
clique of rulers and armament makers may sate their lust for power and
their greed for wealth. Nations are to be obliterated, progress stopped,
and international hatreds erected into deities to be worshipped.</p>
<bibl><title>Forward</title>, <date value="1914-08-15">August 15, 1914</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="43"/>
<div1 n="6" type="article">
<head>A Martyr for Conscience Sake</head>
<p>As I am writing this the news
appears in the press that our comrade, Dr. Karl Liebknecht, has been
shot in Germany for refusing to accept military service in the war. The
news is unconfirmed, and will, I trust, be found later to be untrue, but
I propose to take it this week as a text for my article.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">Karl Liebknecht was afterwards shot during the Spartacist
rising in Berlin on <date value="1919-01-15">January 15, 1919</date> by
German officers. The rumour on which Connolly based his article was
without foundation. Liebknecht was born <date value="1871-08-13">August 13, 1871</date>. As leader of the opposition
to the war he was imprisoned several times. His father, Wilhelm <corr resp="DMD" sic="Liebnecht">Liebknecht</corr>, 1826-1900, took part in
the 1848-9 revolutions in Germany, and was later one of the founders of
German Social Democracy. </note></p>
<p>Supposing, then, that it was
true, what would be the socialist attitude toward the martyrdom of our
beloved comrade? There can be little hesitation in avowing that all
socialists would endorse his act, and look upon his death as a martyrdom
for our cause. And yet if his attitude was correct, what can be said of
the attitude of all those socialists who have gone to the front, and
still more of all those socialists who from press and platform are
urging that nothing should be done now that might disturb the harmony
that ought to exist at home, or spoil the wonderful solidarity of the
nation in this great crisis?</p>
<p>As far as I can understand these
latter, their argument seems to be that they did their whole duty when
they protested against the war, but that now that war has been declared
it is right that they also should arm in defence of their common
country, and act in all things along with their fellow sub-
jects&mdash;those same fellow subjects whose senseless clamour brought
on this awful outburst of murder. We are told, for instance, that the
same policy is being pursued by all socialist parties. That the French
socialists protested against the war&mdash;and then went to the front,
headed by Gustave Herv&eacute;<note type="end" resp="DR">Gustave Herv&eacute;,
mentioned in paragraph three, was for many years an <q>anti-patriot</q> and advocate of <q>revolution sooner
than war</q>. His propaganda earned him repeated imprisonments. Connolly
in the <title>Harp</title> wrote critically of
the Herv&eacute; brand of French anti-militarism. On the eve of the 1914
War, Herv&eacute; changed his views, and later became a violent
nationalist.</note>, the great anti-militarist; the German
socialists protested against the war&mdash; and then, in the Reichstag,
unanimously voted 250 millions to carry it on; the Austrians issued a
manifesto against the war&mdash;and are now on the frontier doing great
deeds of heroism against the foreign enemy; and the Russians erected
barricades <pb n="44"/> in the streets of St. Petersburg against the
cossacks, but immediately war was declared went off to the front arm in
arm with their cossack brothers. And so on. Now, if all this is true,
what does it mean? It means that the socialist parties of the various
countries mutually cancel each other, and that as a consequence
socialism ceases to exist as a world force, and drops out of history
in the greatest crisis of the history of the world, in the very moment
when courageous action will most influence history.</p>
<p>We know that
not more than a score of men in the various Cabinets of the world have
brought about this war, that no European people was consulted upon the
question, that preparations for it have been going on for years, and
that all the alleged <q>reasons</q> for it are so many
afterthoughts invented to hide from us the fact that the intrigues and
schemes of our rulers had brought the world to this pass. All socialists
are agreed upon this. Being so agreed, are we now to forget it all: to
forget all our ideas of human brotherhood, and because some twenty
highly-placed criminals say our country requires us to slaughter our
brothers beyond the seas or the frontiers, are we bound to accept their
statement, and proceed to <emph>slaughter old comrades
abroad at the dictate of old enemies at home</emph>. The idea outrages my
every sense of justice and fraternity. I may be only a voice crying in
the wilderness, a crank amongst a community of the wise, but whoever I
be, I must, in deference to my own self-respect, and to the sanctity of
my own soul, protest against the doctrine that any decree of theirs of
national honour can excuse a socialist who serves in a war which he has
denounced as a needless war, can absolve from the guilt of murder any
socialist who at the dictate of a capitalist Government draws the
trigger of a rifle upon or sends a shot from a gun into the breasts of
people with whom he has no quarrel, and who are his fellow labourers in
the useful work of civilisation.</p>
<p>We have for years informed the
world that we were in revolt <pb n="45"/> against the iniquities of
modern civilisation, but now we hear socialists informing us that it is
our duty to become accomplices of the rulers of modern civilisation in
the greatest of all iniquities, the slaughter of man by his fellow man.
And that as long as we make our formal protest we have done our whole
duty, and can cheerfully proceed to take life, burn peaceful homes, and
lay waste fields smiling with food!</p>
<p>Our comrade, Dr. Liebknecht,
if he has died rather than admit this new doctrine, has died the
happiest death that man can die, has put to eternal shame the thousands
of <q>comrades</q> in every European land, who, with the
cant of brotherhood upon their lips, have gone forth in the armies of
the capitalist rulers&mdash;murdering and to murder. The old veteran
leader of German social democracy, his father, Wilhelm Liebknecht, said
in one of his pamphlets:</p>
<p><q>The working class of the world has
but one enemy&mdash;the capitalist class of the world, those of their
own country at the head of the list.</q></p>
<p>Well and truly has the
son lived up to the truly revolutionary doctrine of the father: lived
and died for its eternal truth and wisdom.</p>
<p>Now we are hearing a
new excuse for the complicity of socialists in this war. It is that this
war will be the last war, its horrors will be so great that humanity
will refuse to allow another.</p>
<p>The homely Irish proverb has it
that <q>far off cows have long horns</q>, or that <q>far away hills are always green</q>. It must have been in
some such spirit that this latest argument was evolved. For what can
happen in the future that is not more applicable now! In the future this
militarist spirit will probably be in the ascendant, new national
prejudices will have been born, new international hatreds called forth.
There will be memories of recent defeats to wipe out, fresh frontiers<pb n="46"/>
 to conserve or to obliterate, and the military caste will
have acquired an ascendancy over the popular imagination because the
large numbers of the various armies will have given rise to widespread
solicitude for their welfare and consequent hopes for their success. If
you have friends or relatives whom you dearly love serving in the army,
you cannot help wishing for the success of that army, and the defeat of
its immediate opponents, and from such a state of feeling to the most
intense jingoism is but a small and easy transition. The large armies of
to-day draw upon the whole population, all are interested in the fate of
their friends or relatives, and we may all be sure that the lying press
can be depended upon to convert solicitude for our friends into pas-
sionate hatred for those whom war makes their opponents.</p>
<p>No; we
cannot draw upon the future for a draft to pay our present duties. There
is no moratorium to postpone the payment of the debt the socialists owe
to the cause; it can only be paid now. Paid it may be in martyrdom, but
a few hundred such martyrdoms would be but a small price to pay to avert
the slaughter of hundreds of thousands. If our German comrade,
Liebknecht, has paid the price, perhaps the others may yet nerve
themselves for that sacrifice. On what conception of national honour can
we blame them, before what fetish of national dignity can we prostrate
ourselves in abasement to atone for their act?</p>
<p>The war of a
subject nation for independence, for the right to live out its own life
in its own way may and can be justified as holy and righteous; the war
of a subject class to free itself from the debasing conditions of
economic and political slavery should at all times choose its own
weapons, and hold and esteem all as sacred instruments of righteousness.
But the war of nation against nation in the interest of royal
freebooters and cosmopolitan thieves is a thing accursed.</p>
<p>All
hail, then, to our continental comrade, who, in a world <pb n="47"/> of
imperial and financial brigands and cowardly trimmers and compromisers
showed mankind that men still know how to die for the holiest of all
causes&mdash;the sanctity of the human soul, the practical brotherhood
of the human race!</p>
<bibl><title>Forward</title>, <date value="1914-08-22">August 22, 1914</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="48"/>
<div1 n="7" type="article">
<head>Connolly's Speech on War's Outbreak</head>
<p>Speaking at a meeting in Dublin, Sunday, <date value="1914-08-30">August 30, 1914</date>, to commemorate the deaths of
James Nolan, John Byrne and Alice Brady, killed during the Dublin
Lockout, 1913-14, Connolly said:</p>
<p>He was glad to see so large a
gathering to commemorate their comrades, because they were murdered for
the sake of great principles. It had not been a mere casual murder, but
a cold-blooded and premeditated one, deliberately planned with the idea
in mind that as they went to their graves, so went the hopes for which
they fought. That when they were murdered all the hopes of the Irish
workers would be slain with them; when they were foully done to death
all our aspirations for a cleaner, better city and grander nation would
be murdered, too. <q>Where do we stand to-day</q>? he continued.
<text>
<body>
<p>The Irish Transport and General Workers' Union and the
hopes of the Irish working class, and that class itself stands erect and
resolute, fearing no man, and the British Government is down on its
knees praying for the Russians to come and save them. Our fight of last
year was not for added wages and reduction of hours; it was for an
opportunity of building up in our midst men and women, a chance to
develop nobility and grandeur of character for men and women, a time to
realise the nobility of life, to study the history of Ireland, to study
our rights as well as our duties; time to develop men and women for the
coming crisis, so that they might take advantage of it when it came.
Abject servility there is in Ireland; whatever of the spirit of a slave
that in you lies, lies with those who served to cripple the grandest
movement ever started. If labour controlled your destinies, conjure the
picture of what might have happened when after Grey and <pb n="49"/>
Asquith had plunged England into war, there arose a clamour for Redmond.
And Redmond, without consulting you, the people of Ireland, pledged us
to war with as kindly, gracious a nation as God ever put the breath of
life into&mdash;what happened then? Redmond when they shouted for him
might have sat still and let them shout, then before another sun rose
got a measure greater than Grattan dreamed of. Redmond, as spokesman of
the majority of the Irish people might have risen and said: <q>I and my
colleagues will go to Ireland and consult the Irish Nation.</q> Then
would Ireland be a nation in reality. <q>We have waited
and now Germany has come, and we will start our own Parliament. Stop us
if you can.</q> Help would have come from all sides. Why the R.I.C.
would have acted as a guard of honour!</p>
<p>These men have sold you.
Sold you? No, by God, given you away. Whether my speech is pro-German or
pro-Irish, I don't know. As an Irish worker I owe a duty to our class;
counting no allegiance to the Empire; I'd be glad to see it back in the
bottomless pit. The Irish workers hold themselves ready to bargain with
whoever can make a bargain. England has been fighting Germany. If it
were not for the Russians, French and Japanese, the British would not
have made a mouthful for the Germans. The Germans are in Boulogne, where
Napoleon projected an invasion of Britain. To Ireland is only a twelve
hours' run. If you are itching for a rifle, itching to fight, have a
country of your own; better to fight for our own country than for the
robber empire. If ever you shoulder a rifle, let it be for Ireland.
Conscription or no conscription, they will never get me or mine. You
have been told you are not strong, that you have no rifles. Revolutions
do not start with rifles; start first and get your rifles after. Our
curse is our belief in our weakness. We are not weak, we are strong.
Make up your mind to strike before your opportunity goes.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<bibl><title>Irish Worker</title>, <date value="1914-09-05">September 5, 1914</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="50"/>
<div1 n="8" type="article">
<head>Can Warfare be Civilised?</head>
<p>The progress of
the great war and the many extraordinary developments accompanying it
are rapidly tending to bring home to the minds of the general public the
truth of the socialist contention that all war is an atrocity, and that
the attempt to single out any particular phase of it as more atrocious
than another is simply an attempt to confuse the public mind.</p>
<p>We
in this journal and in our predecessor, the <title>Irish Worker</title>, have consistently stood
upon that principle. We have held, and do hold, that war is a relic of
barbarism only possible because we are governed by a ruling class with
barbaric ideas; we have held and do hold that the working class of all
countries cannot hope to escape the horrors of war until in all
countries that barbaric ruling class is thrown from power; and we have
held, and do hold that the lust for power on the part of that ruling
class is so deeply rooted in the nature and instinct of its members,
that it is more than probable that nothing less than superior force will
ever induce them to abandon their throttling grasp upon the lives and
liberties of mankind.</p>
<p>Holding such views we have at all times
combatted the idea of war; held that we have no foreign enemies outside
of our own ruling class; held that if we are compelled to go to war we
had much rather fight that ruling class than any other, and taught in
season and out of season that it is the duty of the working class in
self-protection to organise its own force to resist the force of the
master class. The force available to the working class is two-fold,
industrial and political, which latter includes military organisation to
protect political and industrial rights. <q>Those who live by the
sword shall perish by the sword</q> say the Scriptures, and it may well
be that in the progress of events the working class of Ireland may be
called upon to <pb n="51"/> face the stern necessity of taking the sword
(or rifle) against the class whose rule has brought upon them and upon
the world the hellish horror of the present European war. Should that
necessity arise it would be well to realise that the talk of <q>humane methods of warfare</q>, of the <q>rules of civilised warfare</q>, and all such homage to
the finer sentiments of the race are hypocritical and unreal, and only
intended for the consumption of stay-at-homes. There are no humane
methods of warfare, there is no such thing as civilised warfare; all
warfare is inhuman, all warfare is barbaric; the first blast of the
bugles of war ever sounds for the time being the funeral knell of human
progress.</p>
<p>A few illustrations will suffice to drive home these
points. One concerns the outcry over the alleged use of what are known
as dum-dum bullets. It is alleged by both sides that the others are
using those bullets and that they inflict a most grievous wound, and as
they inflict such a serious wound they are opposed to the rules of <q>civilised and humane warfare</q>. The same persons who
raise this cry will calmly read of the firing of shrapnel into a body of
troops and will exult in the result. Yet a shrapnel shell contains 340
bullets which scatter in all directions, tearing off legs and arms,
rending and bursting the human bodies, and in general creating wounds
which no surgical science can hope to cure. How hypocritical, then, is
the pretence of horror over the grievous wound inflicted by a dum-dum
bullet!</p>
<p>Of like character is the outcry over the bombardment of
undefended towns. One would think to read such diatribes that it was not
a recognised practice of all naval warfare. For generations the public
of these islands have been reading of Great Britain sending punitive
expeditions against native tribes in Africa, the islands of the ocean,
or parts of Asia. It may be that some benighted native has stolen a cask
of rum from the compound of a missionary, and thrown a stone at the <pb n="52"/> holy man of God when the latter demanded the return of the cask
in question. Immediately a British man-of-war is ordered to that coast,
opens fire upon and destroys the whole town, indiscriminately massacring
the majority of its inhabitants, women and old men, and babes yet
unborn, all to punish one or two persons for a slight upon a British
subject. That thousands of British subjects are subjected to worse
slights at home every day of their lives is a matter of not enough
consequence to move a policeman, let alone a battleship. Yet up and down
the world the British fleet has gone carrying out such orders, and
bombarding such undefended places without ever moving the inkslingers of
the jingo press to protest.</p>
<p>It all depends, it appears, upon
whose houses are being bombarded, whose people are being massacred,
whose limbs are torn from the body, whose bodies are blown to a ghastly
mass of mangled flesh and blood and bones. The crime of the Germans
seems to consist in believing that what is sauce for the goose is sauce
for the gander.</p>
<p>But what is the theory of the matter? We have
before us the work of M. Bloch on <title>Modern
weapons and modern war</title>, the famous work in which the
methods and results of modern warfare were analysed and foretold long
before they had been brought to the test of practical trial on modern
battlefields. This author, a Pole but a Russian subject, foretold most
of the phenomena accompanying modern campaigns, and has lived to see the
results he predicted in a large measure embodied in the practice of
armies actually in conflict.</p>
<p>To arrive at such a wonderful
accuracy in prediction he was compelled to undertake a systematic
investigation of all the conditions of modern warfare on land and sea
with modern weapons. On the question of undefended towns he has this to
say, and all who have read his works bear witness to his scrupulous
impartiality and freedom from national bias: <text>
<body>
<p>It must be
remembered that, as is shown by the practice <pb n="53"/> of manoeuvres,
the principle that undefended towns are not subject to bombardment is
not acknowledged, and in a future war no towns will be spared. As evi-
dence of this the following case may be cited. On
<date value="1889-08-24">August 24th, 1889</date>, the following letter was addressed by the
commander of the <emph>Collingwood</emph> to the Mayor of
Peterhead: <text>
<body>
<p>By order of the Vice-Admiral commanding the
11th Division of the Fleet, I have to demand from your town a
contribution of &pound;150,000 sterling&hellip;. I must
add that in case the officers who deliver this letter do not return
within the course of two hours the town will be burnt, the shipping
destroyed, and factories ruined.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<p>This letter
was printed in all the newspapers and called forth no protest&hellip;. It is evident then that England will not refrain
from such action when convenient, and as her voice is the most impor-
tant in naval matters, the other Powers will certainly follow her
example.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<p>M. Bloch here cites as an example the
course taken by a British fleet in the course of naval manoeuvres, and
as such manoeuvres are always carried out strictly according to official
handbooks it is safe to assume that in the bombardment of undefended
towns we have a practice authorised by the British Admiralty. Yet
whether authorised by British or German practice or theory, how brutal,
how repulsive, how murderous it is.</p>
<p>Up to the present no such
bombardment has yet taken place, for, of course, the East Coast towns
bombarded were all defended by entrenchments and garrison artillery, but
what lover of humanity can view with anything but horror the prospect of
this ruthless destruction of human life.</p>
<p>Yet this is war: war for
which all the jingoes are howling, war to which all the hopes of the
world are being sacrificed, war to which a mad ruling class would plunge
a mad world. <pb n="54"/> No, there is no such thing as humane or
civilised war! War may be forced upon a subject race or subject class to
put an end to subjection of race, of class, or sex. When so waged it
must be waged thoroughly and relentlessly, but with no delusions as to
its elevating nature, or civilising methods.</p>
<bibl><title>The Worker</title>, <date value="1915-01-30">January 30, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="55"/>
<div1 n="9" type="article">
<head>Revolutionary Unionism and War</head>
<p>Since the war broke out
in Europe, and since the socialist forces in the various countries
failed so signally to prevent or even delay the outbreak, I have been
reading everything in American socialist papers or magazines that came
to hand; to see if that failure and the reasons therefor, were properly
understood among my old comrades in the United States.</p>
<p>But either
I have not seen the proper publications, or else the dramatic side of
the military campaigns has taken too firm a hold upon the imagination of
socialist writers to allow them to estimate properly the inner meaning
of that debacle of political socialism witnessed in Europe when the
bugles of war rang out upon our ears.</p>
<p>I am going then to try, in
all calmness, to relate the matter as it appears to us who believe that
<emph>the signal of war ought also to have been the signal
for rebellion</emph>, that when the bugles sounded the first note for
actual war, their notes should have been taken as the tocsin for social
revolution. And I am going to try to explain why such results did not
follow such actions. My explanation may not be palatable to some; I hope
it will be at least interesting to all.</p>
<p>In the first place let me
be perfectly frank with my readers as to my own position, now that that
possibility has receded out of sight. As the reader will have gathered
from my opening remarks, I believe that the socialist proletariat of
Europe in <emph>all</emph> the belligerent countries ought to
have refused to march against their brothers across the frontiers, and
that such refusal would have prevented the war and all its horrors even
though it might have led to civil war. Such a civil war would not, could
not possibly have resulted in such a loss of socialist life as this
international war has entailed, and each socialist who fell in such <pb n="56"/> a civil war would have fallen knowing that he was battling for
the cause he had worked for in days of peace, and there was no
possibility of the bullet or shell that laid him low having been sent on
its murderous way by one to whom he had pledged the <q>life-long love of
comrades</q> in the international army of labour.</p>
<p>But seeing that
the socialist movement did not so put the faith of its adherents to the
test, seeing that the nations are now locked in this death grapple, and
the issue is knit, I do not wish to disguise from anyone my belief that
there is no hope of peaceful development for the industrial nations of
continental Europe whilst Britain holds the dominance of the sea. The
British fleet is a knife held permanently at the throat of Europe;
should any nation evince an ability to emerge from the position of a
mere customer for British products, and to become a successful
competitor of Britain in the markets of the world, that knife is set in
operation to cut that throat.</p>
<p>By days and by nights the British
Government watches and works to isolate its competitor from the comity
of nations, to ring it around with hostile foes. When the time is
propitious, the blow is struck, the allies of Britain encompass its
rival by land and the fleet of Britain swoops upon its commerce by sea.
In one short month the commerce-raiding fleet of Great Britain destroys
a trade built up in forty years of slow, peaceful industry, as it has
just done in the case of Germany.</p>
<p>Examining the history of the
foreign relations of Great Britain since the rise of the capitalist
class to power in that country, the continuity of this policy becomes
obvious and as marvellous as it is obvious.</p>
<p>Neither religion nor
race affinity nor diversity of political or social institutions availed
to save a competitor of England. The list of commercial rivals or
would-be rivals is fairly large, and gives the economic key to the
reasons for the great wars of Britain. In that list we find Spain,
Holland, France, Denmark <pb n="57"/> and now Germany. Britain must rule
the waves, and when the continental nations wished to make at the Hague
a law forbidding the capture of merchant vessels during war, Britain
refused her assent. Naturally! It is her power to capture merchant ships
during war that enables Britain to cut the throat of a commercial
rival at her own sweet will.</p>
<p>If she had not that power she would
need to depend upon her superiority in technical equipment and
efficiency; and the uprise in other countries of industrial enterprises
able to challenge and defeat her in this world market has amply
demonstrated that she has not that superiority any longer.</p>
<p>The
United States and Germany lead in crowding Britain industrially; the
former cannot be made a target for the guns of militarist continental
Europe, therefore escapes for the time being as Britain never fights a
white power single-handed. But Germany is caught within the net and has
to suffer for her industrial achievements.</p>
<p>The right to capture
merchant ships for which Britain stood out against the public opinion of
all Europe is thus seen to be the trump card of Britain against the
industrial development of the world outside her shores&mdash;against
that complete freedom of the seas by which alone the nations of the
world can develop that industrial status which socialists maintain to
be an indispensable condition for socialist triumph.</p>
<p>I have been
thus frank with my readers in order that they may perfectly understand
my position and the reasons therefor, and thus anticipate some of the
insinuations that are sure to be levelled against me as one who
sympathises nether with the anti-German hysteria of such comrades as
Professor George D. Herron nor with the suddenly developed belief in the
good faith of Czars shown by Prince Peter Kropotkin.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">Professor George D. Herron, American socialist, criticised by
Connolly, <title>Socialist</title>, June, 1904,
as one of those <q>who were in the movement, not for the cause of
socialism, but because they thought they saw in it a means of
ventilating their theories on such questions as sex, religion,
vaccination, vegitarianism, etc</q>. Prince Peter Kropotkin
(1842-1921) Russian revolutionary exile and writer who supported the
Allied side in 1914. Author of <title>The Conquest of
Bread, Fields, Factories and Workshops</title>, and other
works.</note></p>
<p>I believe the war could have been prevented by
the socialists; as it was not prevented and as the issues are knit, I
want to see England beaten so thoroughly that the commerce of the seas<pb n="58"/>
 will henceforth be free to all nations&mdash;to the smallest
equally with the greatest.</p>
<p>But <emph>how could this
war have been prevented</emph>, which is another way of saying how and why
did the socialist movement fail to prevent it?</p>
<p>The full answer to
that question can only be grasped by those who are familiar with the
propaganda that from 1905 onwards has been known as <q>industrialist</q> in the United States and, though not so
accurately, has been called <q>syndicalist</q> in
Europe.</p>
<p>The essence of that propaganda lay in two principles. To
take them in the order of their immediate effectiveness these were:
First, that labour could only enforce its wishes by organising its
strength at the point of production, i.e., the farms, factories,
workshops, railways, docks, ships&mdash;where the work of the world is
carried on, the effectiveness of the political vote depending primarily
upon the economic power of the workers organised behind it. Secondly,
that the process of organising that economic power would also build the
industrial fabric of the socialist republic, build the new society
within the old.</p>
<p>It is upon the first of these two principles I
wish my reader to concentrate their attention in order to find the
answer to the question we are asking.</p>
<p>In all the belligerent
countries of western and central Europe the socialist vote was very
large; in none of these belligerent countries was there an organised
revolutionary industrial organisation directing the socialist vote nor a
socialist political party directing a revolutionary industrial
organisation.</p>
<p>The socialist voters having cast their ballots were
helpless, as voters, until the next election; as workers, they were
indeed in control of the forces of production and distribution, and by
exercising that control over the transport service could have made the
war impossible. But the idea of thus coordinating <pb n="59"/> their
two spheres of activity had not gained sufficient lodgment to be effec-
tive in the emergency.</p>
<p>No socialist party in Europe could say
that rather than go to war it would call out the entire transport
service of the country and thus prevent mobilisation. No socialist party
could say so, because no socialist party could have the slightest
reasonable prospect of having such a call obeyed.</p>
<p>The executive
committee of the socialist movement was not in control of the
labour-force of the men who voted for the socialist representatives in
the legislative chambers of Europe, nor were the men in control of the
supply of labour-force in control of the socialist representatives. In
either case there would have been an organised power immediately
available against war. Lacking either, the socialist parties of Europe
when they had protested against war, had also <emph>fired
their last shot</emph> against militarism and were left like <q>children crying in the night</q>.</p>
<p>Had the
socialist party of France been able to declare that rather than be
dragged into war to save the Russian Czar from the revolutionary
consequences which would have followed his certain defeat by Germany,
they would declare a railway strike, there would have been no war
between France and Germany, as the latter country saved from the dread
of an attack in the west whilst defending itself in the east could not
have coerced its socialist population into consenting to take the
offensive against France.</p>
<p>But the French government knows, the
German government knows, all cool observers in Europe know, that the
socialist and syndicalist organisation of France could not have carried
out such a threat even had they made it. Both politically and
industrially the revolutionary organisations of France are mere skeleton
frameworks, not solid bodies.</p>
<p>Politically large numbers roll
together at elections around the faithful few who keep the machinery of
the party together; <pb n="60"/> industrially, more or less, large
numbers roll together during strikes or lock-outs. But the numbers of
either are shifting, uncertain and of shadowy allegiance. From such no
revolutionary action of value in face of modern conditions of warfare
and state organisation could be expected. And none came.</p>
<p>Hence
the pathetic failure of French socialism&mdash;the socialist battalion
occupying the position of the most tactical importance on the European
battlefield. For neither Russia nor Britain could have fought had France
held aloof; Russia because of the fear of internal convulsions; Britain,
because Britain never fights unless the odds against her foe are
overwhelming. And Britain needed the aid of the French fleet.</p>
<p>To
sum up then, the failure of European socialism to avert the war is
primarily due to the divorce between the industrial and political
movements of labour. The socialist voter, as such, is helpless between
elections. He requires to organise power to enforce the mandate of the
elections and the <emph>only power he can so organise is
economic power</emph>&mdash;the power to stop the wheels of commerce, to
control the heart that sends the life blood pulsating through the social
organism.</p>
<bibl><title>International Socialist Review</title>, March, 1915.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="61"/>
<div1 n="10" type="article">
<head>James Keir Hardie</head>
<p>By the death of Comrade James Keir Hardie labour has
lost one of its most fearless and incorruptible champions, and the world
one of its highest minded and purest souls.</p>
<p>It is not easy for us
who knew him long and personally to convey to the reader how much of a
loss his taking away is to the labour movement. We feel it with the
keenness of a personal loss.</p>
<p>James Keir Hardie was to the labour
movement a prophetic anticipation of its own possibilities. He was a
worker, with all the limitations from which no worker ever completely
escapes, and with potentialities and achievements such as few workers
aspire after, but of which each worker may be the embodiment.</p>
<p>James Keir Hardie himself was ever too modest to say, but we who were
his comrades often thought, that he was a living proof of the truth of
the idea that labour could furnish in its own ranks all that was needed
to achieve its own emancipation, the proof that labour needed no
heaven-sent saviour from the ranks of other classes. He had been denied
the ordinary chances of education, he was sent to earn his living at the
age of seven, he had to educate himself in the few hours he could snatch
from work and sleep, he was blacklisted by the employers as soon as he
gave vent to the voice of labour in his district, he had to face
unemployment and starvation in his early manhood, and when he began to
champion politically the rights of his class he found every prostitute
journalist in these islands throwing mud at his character, and defaming
his associates.</p>
<p>Yet he rose through it all, and above it all,
never faltered in the fight, never failed to stand up for truth and
justice as he saw it, and as the world will yet see it.</p>
<pb n="62"/>
<p>When the vultures of capital descended upon Dublin, resolved to make
Dublin the grave of the new unionism, James Keir Hardie was one of the
first to take his stand in the gap of danger by our sides. And when many
of our friends weakened or were led astray, in the midst of the clamour
of reviling tongues, and rising above it, we could always catch the
encouraging accents of James Keir Hardie bidding the Dublin fighters to
stand fast.</p>
<p>And when the latest great iniquity was being rushed
upon the world, and the contending hosts of Europe were being marshalled
by their masters for the work of murder, James Keir Hardie stood
resolutely for peace and brotherhood among the nations&mdash;refusing to
sanction the claim of the capitalist class of any nation to be the voice
of the best interests of that nation.</p>
<p>May the earth rest lightly
over his bosom.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-10-02">October 2, 1915</date>.</bibl>
<note type="end" resp="DR">James Keir Hardie (1856-1915),
Labour pioneer, close friend of Connolly, and Chairman of the Bradford
conference in 1893 when the Independent Labour Party was founded.</note>
</div1>
<pb n="63"/>
<div1 n="11" type="article">
<head>A Labour Day Speech in Dublin</head>
<p>Mr. James Connolly said that, despite the doubts, the
fears, and the hints of some people, we had this year a magnificent turn
out. He found some difficulty in speaking to them that day. To make
himself heard he would require to have the lungs of a bull, and to steer
clear of the Defence of the Realm Act required the subtlety of a lawyer,
so they would understand his position. We were living in strange and
moving times. The powers that be had seized upon Se&aacute;n McDermott,
Se&aacute;n Milroy and Francis Sheehy-Skeffington for saying what had
already been said a thousand times. He, at least, had no desire to go to
gaol. They had powers that they used to think were oppressive and
tyrannical fighting for liberty and the freedom of small nations. <q>And
when I</q>, continued Mr. Connolly, <q>who have been all my life
fighting, in my own way, for these same objects, see such a great change
come to pass why should I want to go to prison</q>? (Laughter and
applause). He was therefore going to give them good advice. He advised
them all to join the army (Cries of <q>what army</q>? <q>Is it the
Citizen Army</q>?) <q>Well, I won't insult your intelligence by saying
which army, but if I am charged for anything I may say here to-day I
will call you all as witnesses (if I am allowed) to prove that I advised
you all to join the army</q> (Laughter and applause). His advice then
was, <q>join the army</q>. <q>fight for freedom</q>, <q>defend
yourselves</q>. He had spent a good deal of his life in decrying force
as between man and man, but if force was to be the sole arbiter, then
let those who have right on their side gather all the force they can to
help them. His complaint with the resolutions was that they did not go
far enough. They asked the Government to rebuild the slums, but there
was more spent every day on the continent <pb n="64"/> than would rebuild
all Ireland. All Governments were doing this, and would continue doing
it until the workers took the world into their own hands, and ran it for
the benefit of those who alone did the world's work&mdash;the workers.
Sir Thomas More had well expressed the position when he wrote <q>I can
see nothing in the Governments of the world but a conspiracy of the rich
for the purpose of robbing the poor</q>. He was beheaded, and was it any
wonder that they cut off a head that gave utterance to so much wisdom?
Peace was a virtue they were told, and for forty years the Home Rule
party had been preaching peace, and had got very little for their pains.
On the other hand Sir Edward Carson had preached force for a few short
months, and had got all he demanded; and after Carson had poured
contempt on the law, and had on a hundred platforms urged defiance of
the law, he was now Attorney-General, having supreme charge of the
enforcement of the law (laughter). I am a law-abiding citizen
(laughter). I believe in the law&mdash;when it's big enough (laughter).
Why had not the Government squelched Carson as they had always been
prepared to squelch the labour men? As the result of all this law-
breaking Carson was now in the Cabinet, and Home Rule was indefinitely
shelved. If they turned to the ranks of labour they would see the only
class that never sold Ireland (loud applause). When you stand for labour
you stand for Ireland. Join your union and help in the fight to win back
your own land for labour. Join in the fight for a free and regenerated
Ireland, which will emancipate not alone yourselves but your children
and your children's children (loud applause).</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-06-05">June 5, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="65"/>
<div1 n="12" type="article">
<head>Our disappearing Liberties</head>
<p>One of the commonplaces of the
political orator is the saying that <q>the price of liberty is eternal
vigilance</q>, a saying which implies that the liberties of mankind are
continually endangered from the inroads of unscrupulous enemies against
whose attacks we must ever be on the alert. It implies also that the
normal state of society is a state of war; that mankind, even amongst
the most progressive nations, is ever in danger of seeing its painfully
acquired liberties wrested from it and fresh chains substituted, and
that consequently they who wish to see progress maintained and the
bounds of freedom enlarged must be ever on the watch lest upon some
specious excuse they lost in a day what their fathers agonised for
generations to win.</p>
<p>This political proverb we seem in peril of
forgetting in these troublous times. On every side we see fresh inroads
made upon our liberties, but no Irish voice is raised in protest,
perhaps no Irish voice dare be raised. But no matter what the risk be,
we who essay to voice the hopes and defend the cause of Labour dare not
be silent. The needs of the multitude call for expression&mdash;it shall
not be said they called in vain. If fresh chains are forged for the
workers it shall not be said that we by our silence allowed those who
trusted us to remain ignorant of the fact that the chains were in
preparation.</p>
<p>In the first place we direct attention to the fact
that the meanest and cruellest form of conscription is already in active
operation in this country. Without consulting anyone as to their
opinions upon the justification or otherwise of this war employers are
every day giving to their employees the intimation that they must choose
between enlistment and starvation. It matters not that the employer may
himself be young or <pb n="66"/> vigorous, or have sons young and
vigorous, whilst the workman may have a family of little children
depending upon him, that employer sits smoking in his office chair and
orders the helpless wage-slave to don a uniform he hates, or suffer
dismissal and starvation. No greater violation of the right of the
individual has ever been known to history. When a man is ordered to take
a deadly weapon and proceed to kill a human being with whom he believes
he has no grounds of quarrel, personal or national, if the fear of
starvation makes him obey that order, then the person issuing that
command is guilty of the foulest crime known to humanity&mdash;the
murder of a human soul. Against such an attack upon the liberty of the
individual we protest, and call upon all to protest. Conscription is
bad, we hate the thought of it, but conscription is at least openly
brutal; this conscription by starvation is foul with the foulness of
Hell. We are not alone in this belief. There are thousands who believe
in the justness of this war who are sickened with loathing of the means
taken to obtain soldiers to carry it on.</p>
<p>Throughout Ireland every
day we read of prosecutions under the Defence of the Realm Act in which
the triviality of the charges are such as are calculated to bring more
contempt than respect upon those responsible. For that we do not repine,
nor pretend to repine. But when it appears that the liberty of the most
respectable man or woman in this country is absolutely at the mercy of
the most disreputable and drunken soldier that ever disgraced a uniform,
it is time to call a halt. In many cases we have seen drunken soldiers
deliberately pick quarrels with respectable civilians, and after abusing
and ill-treating them call upon the police to arrest those whom they had
abused and ill-treated. The police always obey, and the magistrates
always convict. On the tram, in the streets, in places of amusement or
refreshment, nowadays it is a positive danger to be in the proximity of
a soldier. Many of these are decent, <corr resp="DMD" sic="cleanly">clearly</corr> enough, but at any time the lowest amongst<pb n="67"/>
 them may elect to force his gross conversation upon you, and
should you resent, the services of the police are called in and a term
of imprisonment is certain.</p>
<p>On Sunday whilst the Dublin Labour
Day procession was going to the Phoenix Park one of those rowdies
attempted to ride a bicycle right through the thickest ranks of the
processionists; others on the ground in the Park endeavoured by ribald
language and horseplay to stir up trouble wherever they saw groups of
policemen convenient to their activities, but fortunately the
demonstrators strong in the consciousness of their own power were not
moved to active hostility.</p>
<p>We wonder if the governing authorities
are really aware of all this. Surely no one can be so fatuous as to
imagine that the British Army can be popularised by such methods. If
we did believe that this kind of thing had really the support of the
government we should not waste our space in chronicling it; it is
because we realise that it may spread upward that we speak ere it be too
late. Magistrates, and soldiers and policemen and Coalition Cabinets
must be made to understand that they all exist in theory for the sake of
serving the civilian. If the contrary obtains, if, as seems to be the
danger in Ireland, the civilian subordinated to the soldier, and becomes
a dog for all those we have named to kick and abuse, then it will become
very difficult indeed to understand wherein lies that constitutional
freedom we have lately heard so much about.</p>
<p>The liberty of public
meeting is also rapidly becoming a thing of the past in Ireland, as far
as it is or may be used for the criticism of the activities of the
government or its functionaries; and yet it is this very right of the
subject to criticise the governing bodies which is the very essence of
freedom in a constitutionally governed country. Without the freedom of
the press and the right of public meeting there is no citizenship; there
are only the relations of subject and rulers, of slaves and
slave-drivers. The question of whether the press is or is not <pb n="68"/> wrong in its criticisms, or whether the public meeting does or
does not advocate wise measures or use wise language has no bearing
upon the matter. The press criticisms are subject to the judgment of the
readers; the public meeting stands or falls with the justice of its
cause. To allow either to be judged or punished by those against whom
they are directed, is to abolish all constitutional guarantees and to
establish the naked rule of force. Against that we protest with all our
strength. It is idle to speak of great national emergencies requiring
such suppression of liberties. Great national emergencies can only be
met by calling upon the reserves of good in our national character, by
invoking the aid of all that is best and ennobling. Whatever cause seeks
to flourish by stifling criticism and imprisoning thought is a hateful
cause, and can only rely upon the support of those natures who turn
instinctively to darkness and obscurity.</p>
<p>For all who love the
light for the help it brings to the cause of progress the duty is plain.
Every one of the liberties our fathers won must be fought for
tenaciously! War or no war one of our hard won rights should be, or will
be, surrendered without a struggle.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-06-05">June 5, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="69"/>
<div1 n="13" type="article">
<head>Why the Citizen Army honours Rossa</head>
<p>In honouring O'Donovan Rossa the
workers of Ireland are doing more than merely paying homage to an
unconquerable fighter. They are signifying their adhesion to the
principle of which Rossa till his latest days was a living
embodiment&mdash;the principle that the freedom of a people must in the
last analysis rest in the hands of that people&mdash;that there is no
outside force capable of enforcing slavery upon a people really resolved
to be free, and valuing freedom more than life. We in Ireland have often
forgotten that truth, indeed it may be even asserted that only an
insignificant minority of the nation ever learned it. And yet, that
truth once properly adopted as the creed of a nation would become the
salvation of the nation.</p>
<p>For slavery is a thing of the soul,
before it embodies itself in the material things of the world. I assert
that before a nation can be reduced to slavery its soul must have been
cowed, intimidated or corrupted by the oppressor. Only when so cowed,
intimidated or corrupted does the soul of a nation cease to urge forward
its body to resist the imposition of the shackles of slavery; only when
the soul so surrenders does any part of the body consent to make truce
with the foe of its national existence.</p>
<p>When the soul is
conquered the articulate expression of the voice of the nation loses its
defiant accent, and taking on the whining colour of compromise, begins
to plead for the body. The unconquered soul asserts itself, and declares
its sanctity to be more important than the interests of the body; the
conquered soul ever pleads first that the body may be saved even if the
soul is damned.</p>
<p>For generations this conflict between the
sanctity of the soul and the interests of the body has been waged in
Ireland. <pb n="70"/> The soul of Ireland preached revolution, declared
that no blood-letting could be as disastrous as a cowardly acceptance of
the rule of the conqueror, nay, that the rule of the conqueror would
necessarily entail more blood-letting than revolt against the rule. In
fitful moments of spiritual exaltation Ireland accepted that idea, and
such men as O'Donovan Rossa becoming possessed of it became thenceforth
the living embodiment of that gospel. But such supreme moments passed
for the multitude, and the nation as a nation sank again into its
slavery, and its sole articulate expression to reach the ears of the
world were couched in the fitful accents of the discontented, but
spiritless slave&mdash;blatant in his discontent, spiritless in his
acceptance of subjection as part of the changeless order of things.</p>
<p>The burial of the remains of O'Donovan Rossa in Irish soil, and the
functions attendant thereon must inevitably raise in the mind of every
worker the question of his or her own mental attitude to the powers
against which the departed hero was in revolt. That involves the
question whether those who accept that which Rossa rejected have any
right to take part in honour paid to a man whose only title to honour
lies in his continued rejection of that which they have accepted. It is
a question each must answer for himself or herself. But it can neither
be answered carelessly, nor evaded.</p>
<p>The Irish Citizen Army in its
constitution pledges its members to fight for a Republican Freedom for
Ireland. Its members are, therefore, of the number who believe that at
the call of duty they may have to lay down their lives for Ireland, and
have so trained themselves that at the worst the laying down of their
lives shall constitute the starting point of another glorious tradi-
tion&mdash;a tradition that will keep alive the soul of the nation.</p>
<p>We are, therefore, present to honour O'Donovan Rossa by right of our
faith in the separate destiny of our country, and our faith in the
ability of the Irish workers to achieve that destiny.</p>
<bibl><title>Rossa Souvenir</title>, <date value="1915-07">July, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="71"/>
<div1 n="14" type="article">
<head>The Man and the Cause!</head>
<p>On
Sunday, <date value="1915-08-01">August First</date>, we propose to pay
public homage in Dublin to the remains and memory of Jeremiah O'Donovan
Rossa. It is well then that we strive to make clear not only to the
public, but to ourselves, upon what grounds that homage is paid. We
belong to the working class of Ireland, and strive to express the
working class point of view. Always and ever the working class movement
seeks after clearness of thought, as a means to the accomplishment of
working class aims. The middle class may and does deceive itself with
finely turned phrases, and vague generalising of still vaguer
aspirations, but the working class can think and speak only in language
hard and definite, as hard and definite as the conditions of working
class life. We have no room in our struggle for illusions&mdash;least of
all for illusions about freedom.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">O'Donovan Rossa died in
New York on <date value="1915-06-29">June 29, 1915</date>. His body was
brought back to Ireland, and the funeral on <date value="1915-08-01">August 1st, 1915</date>, to Glasnevin from the Dublin
City Hall was an imposing demonstration in which the Irish Volunteers,
Citizen Army and thousands of people joined. At the graveside Pearse
delivered a historic oration.</note></p>
<p>O'Donovan Rossa
represents to us a revolutionary movement the least aristocratic and the
most plebeian that ever raised itself to national dignity in Ireland. It
was a movement that resting upon the masses of people in Ireland, and
drawing its inspirations from the hearts of that people, was suc-
cessful in inspiring its followers with such a belief in their own
ability to conquer and master the future, that it nerved them to
conspire for a revolt against the British Empire at a time when that
Empire was at peace with all the world. The mere conception of such a
struggle, the stark naked fact that such a project was ever even mooted,
in itself stamps as heroes all who cherished and suffered for it. Grand
indeed must have been the souls, magnificent must have been the
courage, splendid the idealism of the men and women who with the awful
horror of the famine of Black '47, and inglorious '48, still in their
minds were not capable of rising to the spiritual level of challenging
the power <pb n="72"/> of England in 1865 or 1867. There were giants in
those days! Are we pigmies in these?</p>
<p>These men realised that no
nation is conquered until its mind is conquered, until it accepts
defeat. No nation capable of, however futilely and impotently, denying
with arms in the hands of even a few of its sons that it is conquered
and submerged in its conqueror, can be considered as having lost its
existence. In the present European hell-broth the diplomats, writers and
speakers of the world freely discuss the chances of re-establishing many
nations long subdued and banished from the roll of nations, but in no
one of these discussions does the name of Ireland figure. Because
Ireland has surrendered its separate national identity&mdash;Ireland
has become a mere geographical expression. To the world Ireland speaks
through its elected representatives, through its press, through its
great organs of public opinion, and so speaking has announced itself a
local province of the British Empire.</p>
<p>The sons of Ireland who are
in arms are in arms for England, the blood of Ireland that flows in
torrents every day flows for England, the Irish men who die fighting
like heroes and demigods die fighting for England. Ireland knows them
not, can never number them amongst her possessions, can never tell the
tale of their sufferings and exploits as sufferings and exploits for
her.</p>
<p>And yet Ireland dare not blame them! The least of these, our
brothers, would have fought for Ireland if those who spoke in Ireland's
name had but had the courage to call them, to summon them to the
sacrifice. But all, all failed in the supreme moment of destiny. And it
seems to us that when the eternal reckoning is made, God in His infinite
wisdom will deal less harshly with the Irish Tommies in the English
service than He will with the unscrupulous politicians, or blatant
revolutionaries, who stood by in silence and let our poor brothers march
out to their fruitless martyrdom in Flanders or the Dardanelles. <pb n="73"/> They shrank from the responsibility of giving the word not
realising that they thereby took on the more shameful responsibility of
failing to give the word.</p>
<p>Rossa was one of the men who in the
clays of another generation assumed the responsibility from which these
men shrank, and assumed it amid greater difficulties. He had to face
not only the possibility of defeat at the hands of a foreign tyrant, but
he had also to face the certainty of odium and hatred from those he was
prepared to die to liberate. Every <q>respectable</q>
class in the country was against the Fenians, all the press was against
them, most of the clergy denounced them from the altar, all the members
of parliament hated them with a fierce and malevolent hatred. They were
accused of conspiracy to destroy religion, a priest refused to solemnise
the marriage of Rossa himself, alleging that he was outside the pale of
the Church, every conceivable wickedness was imputed them, they were
said to be enemies of the family, of society, of morals.<note n="2" type="end" resp="DR">See Rossa's <title>Prison Life</title>
(1874) pp. 29-30. After a heated argument, Father Leader, P.P.,
Clonakilty, finally agreed to give an order to the curate of the parish
to marry Rossa to his third wife, Mary Jane Irwin.</note></p>
<p>Against such enemies they held their own, and if they failed to
emancipate their country or win for it a place amongst the nations of
the earth, they at least succeeded in establishing in the mind of the
world the fact of the independent existence of Ireland. Their greatest
enemies were those of their own race. They failed, but it was a failure
more glorious than many a victory. But its glory consisted in the fact
that against all odds, and in spite of the calculations of the trimmers
and wiseacres there were proven to be in Ireland thousands of men and
women who were prepared to affirm with their lives that Ireland was a
nation with an independent destiny of its own. Neither terrified nor
corrupted, the Fenians redeemed the honour of their nation, and we of
the working class are proud to remember that those heroes were of our
own class.</p>
<p>When we honour Rossa we honour in him the fearless
representative of a great movement&mdash;a movement that accomplished<pb n="74"/>
 great things. We honour the latest of those who in days of
darkness pledged their faith to an Irish Republic, and kept that faith
unsullied to the last.</p>
<p>We on our part affirm that we march behind
the remains because we are prepared to fight for the same ideals. And we
shall be all the more nerved for fight when we remember that the banner
of Fenianism was upheld by the stalwart hands of the Irish working class
of that day, as the militant organisation of the same class to-day is
the only body that without reservation unhesitatingly announces its
loyalty to the republican principle of national freedom for which the
Fenians stood. We are here because this is our place!</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-07-31">July 31, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="75"/>
<div1 n="15" type="article">
<head>Ireland's Travail and Ireland's Resurrection</head>
<p>Never did
Ireland see a more soul-stirring outpouring of the Gael than was
witnessed on last Sunday, <date value="1915-08-01">August 1,
1915</date>.</p>
<p>We do not know whether the McManus Funeral&mdash;to
name the occasion with which it is most customary to draw
comparisons&mdash;was or was not more imposing in point of numbers than
the turn-out in honour of O'Donovan Rossa, but we do know that in all
other respects this latter called for a greater exercise of courage and
faith in the future than either the McManus or any other demonstration
ever seen in Ireland. Let us set forth the position clearly to our own
minds.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">The funeral of Terence Bellew McManus, 1848 veteran
in Dublin, <date value="1867-11-10">November 10, 1867</date>, was
according to T. C. Luby, quoting the press of the time, attended by
200,000 people between marchers and spectators, John O'Leary, <title>Recollections</title>, Vol. I, p.
163.</note></p>
<p>The McManus Funeral was the first sign of the
uprising of Irish Nationality after the shameful, sorrowful days of
1847-48 and 1849. Ireland, in the words of James Fintan Lalor, <q>sank
and surrendered to the famine</q>, and with no resistance of the
importance even of a riot had gone down before the blows of the enemy.
So completely had she gone down that many of her rebels formally gave up
the struggle, and announced their belief that the cause of Ireland's
separate existence was a lost cause. The case of M. J. Barry, the gifted
author of that splendid revolutionary song, all too seldom sung
nowadays, <title>Bide Your Time</title>, may be
cited as a notable example. But this surrender of Ireland, this defeat
of Ireland, was a surrender and defeat inflicted by the enemy against
the protests and vain struggles of the representatives of the Irish
people.</p>
<p>All the organised life of Ireland protested against the
means by which the potato blight was used to create a famine, against
the methods employed to make that famine subservient to English policy.
Their protests were ineffectual, they who were <pb n="76"/> willing to
let the case go to the arbitrament of battle waited too long and lost
their chance, and they who were not so willing were equally unable to
stem the tide of demoralisation. <q>The soul of Ireland sank where that
of other nations would soar</q>, and the cause was lost. But the issues
were left clear in the public mind. It was still the existence of
Ireland against the public policy of England.</p>
<p>For the year
preceding the Rossa Funeral the conditions of Ireland were entirely
different. The cause of Ireland as a separate nation, as a nation with a
separate life, history, and individuality of its own, was again looked
upon as a lost cause, and the fate of Ireland was again accepted as
being irrevocably and finally blended with that of the British
Empire.</p>
<p>But unlike the days of '48 the days of the past twelve
months were remarkable for the fact that the abandonment of the cause
of Ireland as a separate nationality, the merging of the hopes of
Ireland in the success of England, the definite declaration that the
British Empire could count Ireland as finally conquered and made <q>loyal</q>&mdash;all this came not from without, not
imposed upon us in the hour of our weakness, but from within, and
accepted in the moment of our greatest tactical strength by the leaders
trusted by the majority of our people. For twelve months&mdash;twelve
long dreary agonising months&mdash;we have seen war in Ireland, war upon
the soul of the Irish people, war upon the traditions, the religious
spirit, the holiest aspirations, the centuried hopes of the martyred men
and women who had made Ireland famed and respected wherever there are
gathered men and women capable of honouring fortitude in disaster, and
sublimity of soul in the midst of defeat.</p>
<p>Never has a nation
suffered such an onslaught. Belgium in its agonies under the heel of the
invaders, nor Poland in its awful travail, cannot claim to have suffered
as Ireland has suffered since war was declared. Betrayed and deserted by
all but a faithful few, Ireland was attacked by every poisonous <pb n="77"/> agency ever brought to bear upon the mind and soul of a people.
Her religion, her love of nationality, her strict sexual morality, her
natural affection for the weak, her sympathy for suffering and
distress&mdash;every high and noble instinct implanted in her by ages of
suffering, was appealed to that her children might deny the past of
their country, and surrender their hopes of moulding its future.
Ireland was asked, nay, was ordered, to deny all that her martyrs had
affirmed, to affirm all that her martyrs had denied. And this assault
upon the soul of the country was planned and carried out in all its
minutest and most revolting details by the men whom a cruel fate had
allowed to become the leaders and guides of Irish public opinion.</p>
<p>The fight in Belgium and in Poland are fights for the material
possession of towns and cities, the fight in Ireland has been one for
the soul of a race&mdash;that Irish race which with seven centuries of
defeat behind it still battled for the sanctity of its dwelling
place.</p>
<p>Old mediaeval legends tell us how in the critical moments
of the struggle of an army, or the travail of a nation, some angel or
deliveror was sent from above to save those favoured by the Most High.
To many people to-day it seems that the funeral of O'Donovan Rossa came
to Ireland in such a moment of national agony&mdash;came on such a
mission of divine uplifting and deliverance. The mists and doubts, the
corruption and poisons, the distrust and the treacheries, were blown
away, and the true men and women of Ireland saw with pleasure the rally
of the nation to the olden ideas&mdash;saw the real people of the
country solemnly bearing witness to the faith and wisdom of those who
had <q>fought a good fight, and kept the faith</q>.</p>
<p>The McManus
Funeral rallied the people of Ireland after their defeat by the enemy;
the Rossa funeral rallied the people of Ireland after the onslaught of
her faithless leaders.</p>
<pb n="78"/>
<p>Will the rallied Irish people
stand fast as well as they whom they honoured?</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-08-07">August 7, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="79"/>
<div1 n="16" type="article">
<head>The Party versus the People</head>
<p>On Monday, <date value="1915-08-30">August 30th</date>, the <title>Freeman's Journal</title><note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">Then
the daily organ of the Irish Parliamentary Party. Founded by Dr.
Lucas&mdash;or according to others by Henry Brooke&mdash;in 1763 it had
a dramatic life until it ceased publication in 1924, being then the
oldest newspaper in Great Britain and Ireland.</note> devoted a long
leading article to telling of the many changes for the better that have
been wrought in Ireland for the past forty years. The political changes,
the changes in the laws governing the owning and occupying of land, the
various ameliorations of the condition of the poor in the country
districts, the increase of public control in affairs of local
government&mdash;all these things were gone into with a wealth of detail
and at the same time with a florid style and boastfulness of descrip-
tion that the mere parliamentarian has made us all familiar with to the
point of nausea. And why are we treated to this story? We are treated to
this story in an attempt to silence the critics of the Home Rule Party
by representing that all the great and beneficent changes mentioned in
the <title>Freeman</title> are due to the
activities of that Party, and that therefore the critics of the Party
are foolish and ignorant, or are basely ungrateful.</p>
<p>Readers of
the <title>Freeman's Journal</title> if they can
be deceived by such rubbish are surely unfit to be entrusted with the
franchise, or, indeed, with any power over the destinies of their
country. The benefits that have been gained, and some of them are
undoubted, have been gained by the heroic fighting and sacrifices of the
Irish <emph>people</emph>, and a political party was only one,
and not the most important one, of the many weapons forged and used by
the Irish people during that fighting, and as a result of their
sacrifices. Landlordism in its worst phases was not abolished, the right
of a tenant to security in his tenure was not secured, the purchase of
proprietary rights by the tenantry was not accomplished by the mere
presence of eighty-five spouters in the British House of Commons. On the
contrary, these vain glorious gentlemen were only able to secure a
hearing <pb n="80"/> by virtue of the fact that the Land League by its
fighting in Ireland had brought this country into civil war, and had so
utterly destroyed the value of Irish landed property that not a
moneylender in Europe would then loan money upon its security. The Home
Rule Party were merely the ambassadors at a Foreign
Court&mdash;ambassadors who remained powerless until the popular armies
in Ireland had struck down landlordism in spite of evictions, battering
rams, imprisonment and death. The extent of our indebtedness to the Home
Rule Party can be gauged by measuring the relative achievements of the
people who fought and won the fight on the land question&mdash;a fight
fought and won outside Parliament&mdash;and the people who fought and
lost the battle of Home Rule&mdash;a purely parliamentary battle.</p>
<p>The people met all the combined forces of landlordism and the British
Crown, broke up the social system they had imposed upon the agricultural
population, and tore a measure of social freedom and economic security
from their reluctant grasp. The Irish parliamentarians met the British
politicians on their own chosen field of battle&mdash;and lost every
move of the game. Every time the astute British politicians called for a
sacrifice on the part of the Irish Home Rule Party that party yielded
the point and sacrificed their principles. They yielded to sacrifice
Ulster and divide their country, they yielded the control of taxation,
they yielded control over the Post Office, Customs and Excise; in short,
they yielded everything that gives <corr resp="DMD" sic="live">life</corr> and power to a nation. And finally, when their
grandest opportunity came in the breath of war they yielded up countless
thousands of the lives of their trusting fellow-countrymen.</p>
<p>And
in return they achieved&mdash;NOTHING. Home Rule, pitiful abortion as it
is, is hung up, and side by side with the law suspending it is framed
the declaration of the English Prime Minister that it would in his
opinion be unthinkable to force Home Rule upon Orange Ulster. So that
the politicians <pb n="81"/> as a result of their forty years babbling in
the wilderness at Westminster can only record their failure to achieve
that which was to them as the breath of their nostrils, whereas the
Irish people fighting in Ireland upon the battleground of their farms,
leagues, and trade unions, have compelled an unwilling legislature to
pass measure after measure enacting as law that which the power of the
people had already won as rights.</p>
<p>As servants of England the
members of the Home Rule Party are perhaps entitled to their salaries,
but if their claim to &pound;400 per year is based upon achievements for
Ireland the claim is but an impudent attempt to obtain money under false
pretences.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-09-04">September 4, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="82"/>
<div1 n="17" type="article">
<head>God Help the poor Irish</head>
<p>To all thoughtful labour men and women the recent
meeting of the British Trade Union Congress presented a rather sorrowful
spectacle. Time was when that Congress was regarded as embodying all the
bright hopes and aspirations of a working class rapidly freeing itself
from the mental and political fetters inherited from ages of
servitude. Time was when the most beloved spokesmen of that Congress
were those who most passionately declared that it was the duty of the
workers to overthrow all the social, political and military tyrannies
rooted in the capitalist system of which the British Empire is the per-
fected fruit. Time was when the unanimous voice of that Congress
declared that the working class had no enemy except the capitalist
class&mdash;that of its own country at the head of the list. Time was
when the orators at all the meetings attendant upon that Congress
declaimed their love of human brotherhood, and their contempt for all
the racial, religious and national catchcries that were used to keep the
peoples separate and warring.</p>
<p>But now! Alas, how have the mighty
fallen! Gone are all the bright hopes of a class fighting to free itself
from fetters, and scornfully contemptuous of the interests or ambitions
of its masters. Instead, we have a Congress deliberately putting aside
the hopes of the workers in order to help the schemes of murder set on
foot by the capitalist state. We have a Congress where a leader like
George N. Barnes uses his position to attack his own Union for insisting
upon its Trade Union rights; where a leader like the President of the
Congress advises his hearers not to read literature presenting a dif-
ferent view on the war to that popularised by the capitalist newspapers;
where a leader like Ben Tillett foams at the mouth against those who <pb n="83"/> desire peace as a few months ago he foamed at the mouth against
those who desired war; where every voice belched forth hatred of their
brothers under a different government, and where the quarrels fomented
by the capitalist class were made more important as standards of worth
than services in the interests of Labour, or aspirations for a world
where men can live guiltless of plotting the murder of their fellow men.
A Congress which declared against compulsory service or conscription,
but in the same breath declared it would accept it if its rulers
declared it to be necessary.</p>
<p>We have ere now looked hopefully to
the British Trade Union Congress, but our hopes are gone. The British
Empire is ruled by the most astute ruling class in the world; the
British working class is the most easily fooled working class in the
world.</p>
<p>God help the poor Irish as long as they remain yoked to
such a combination.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-09-18">September 18, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="84"/>
<div1 n="18" type="article">
<head>In Praise of the Empire</head>
<p>We want to say a few words in praise of the Empire.
Now, do not get startled, or shocked, nor yet think that we are only
sarcastic. We are not abandoning our principles, nor forgetting our
wrongs, nor giving up as hopeless the fight for our rights, nor yet
exercising the slave's last privilege&mdash;that of sneering at his
masters.</p>
<p>We do not love the Empire; we hate it with an
unqualified hatred, but, nevertheless, we admire it. Why should we
not!</p>
<p>Consider well what this Empire is doing to-day, and then see
if you can withhold your admiration.</p>
<p>At the present moment this
Empire has dominions spread all over the seven seas. Everywhere it holds
down races and nations, that it might use them as its slaves, that it
might use their territories as sources of rent and interest for its
aristocratic rulers, that it might prevent their development as
self-supporting entities and compel them to remain dependent customers
of English produce, that it might be able to strangle every race or
nation that would enter the field as a competitor against British
capitalism or assert its independence of the British capitalist.</p>
<p>To do this it stifles the ancient culture of India, strangles in its
birth the new-born liberty of Egypt, smothers in the blood of ten
thousand women and children the republics of South Africa, betrays into
the hands of Russian despotism the trusting nationalists of Persia,
connives at the partition of China, and plans the partition of
Ireland.</p>
<p>North, south, east and west it has set its foot upon the
neck of peoples, plundering and murdering, and mocking as it outraged.
In the name of a superior civilization it has crushed the development
of native genius, and in the name of superior <pb n="85"/> capitalist
development it has destroyed the native industries of a sixth of the
human race.</p>
<p>In the name of liberty it hangs and imprisons
patriots, and whilst calling High Heaven to witness its horror of
militarism it sends the shadow of its swords between countless millions
and their hopes of freedom.</p>
<p>Despite all this, despite the fact
that every day the winds of the earth are laden with the curses which
its unwilling subjects in countless millions pray upon its flag, yet
that flag flies triumphantly over every one of its possessions, even
whilst its soldiers are reeling discomfited and beaten before the
trenches of Turk and German.</p>
<p>The British Empire never fought a
white European foe single-handed, never dared yet to confront an equal
unaided, yet it has laid upon its subjects everywhere from Ireland to
India and from India to Africa, the witchcraft of belief in its luck, so
that even whilst they see it beaten to its knees they are possessed with
the conviction that it will pull through in some fashion. The Devil's
children have their father's luck!</p>
<p>Without that belief, without
that conviction of the slaves that their master must remain in
possession of his mastership, the British Empire would to-day be
everywhere lit up with the fires of mutiny and insurrection.</p>
<p>In
the labour movement we have long ago learned that it is the worker who
is convinced of the power of the capitalist, who believes that <q>the big fellows are sure to win</q>, it is he who really
keeps labour in subjection, defeats strikes and destroys Trade Unions.
The problem before the labour movement is always to find out how this
hopeless feeling can be destroyed, and confidence implanted in the bosom
where despair usually reigns.</p>
<p>The moment the worker no longer
believes in the all-conquering strength of the employer is the moment
when the way opens out to the emancipation of our class. <pb n="86"/></p>
<p>The master class realise this, and hence all their agencies bend
their energies towards drugging, stupefying and poisoning the minds of
the workers&mdash;sowing distrust and fear amongst them.</p>
<p>The
ruling class of the British Empire also know it, and hence they also
utilise every agency to spread amongst the subject races a belief in the
luck of England, in the strength of England, in the omnipotence of
England. That belief is worth more to the British Empire than ten army
corps; when it goes, when it is lost, there will be an uprising of
resurgent nationalities&mdash;and a crash of falling Empires.</p>
<p>Should we not therefore admire the Empire that in face of danger can
yet fascinate and enthral the minds of its slaves and keep them in
mental as well as physical subjection&hellip;?</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-10-09">October 9, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="87"/>
<div1 n="19" type="article">
<head>A War for Civilisation</head>
<p>We are hearing and reading a lot just now
about a war for civilisation. In some vague, ill-defined manner we are
led to believe that the great empires of Europe have suddenly been
seized with a chivalrous desire to right the wrongs of mankind, and have
sallied forth to war, giving their noblest blood and greatest measures
to the task of furthering the cause of civilisation.</p>
<p>It seems
unreal, but it may be possible. Great emotions sometimes master the most
cold and calculating individuals, pushing them on to do that which in
their colder moments they would have sneered at. In like manner great
emotions sometimes master whole communities of men and women, and
nations have gone mad, as in the Crusades, over matters that did not
enter into any scheme of selfish calculation.</p>
<p>But in such cases
the great emotions manifested themselves in at least an appropriate
manner. Their actions under the influence of great emotions had a
relation to the cause or the ideal for which they were ostensibly
warring.</p>
<p>In the case of the war for civilisation, however, we
look in vain for any action which in itself bears the mark of
civilisation. As we count civilisation it means the ascendancy of
industry and the arts of industry over the reign of violence and
pillage. Civilisation means the conquest by ordered law and peaceful
discussion of the forces of evil, it means the exaltation of those whose
strength is only in the righteousness of their cause over those whose
power is gained by a ruthless seizing of domination founded on
force.</p>
<p>Civilisation necessarily connotes the gradual supplanting
of the reign of chance and muddling by the forces of order and careful
provision for the future; it means the levelling up of <pb n="88"/>
classes, and the initiation of the people into a knowledge and enjoyment
of all that tends to soften the natural hardships of life and to make
that life refined and beautiful.</p>
<p>But the war for civilisation has
done none of those things&mdash;aspires to do none of these things. It
is primarily a war upon a nation whose chief crime is that it refuses to
accept a position of dependence, but insists instead upon organising its
forces so that its people can co-operate with nature in making their
lives independent of chance, and independent of the goodwill of
others.</p>
<p>The war for civilisation is a war upon a nation which
insists upon organising its intellect so as to produce the highest and
best in science, in art, in music, in industry; and insists moreover
upon so co-ordinating and linking up all these that the final result
shall be a perfectly educated nation of men and women.</p>
<p>In the
past civilisation has been a heritage enjoyed by a few upon a basis of
the brutalisation of the vast multitude; that nation aims at a
civilisation of the whole resting upon the whole, and only made possible
by the educated co-operation of an educated whole.</p>
<p>The war for
civilisation is waged by a nation like Russia, which has the greatest
proportion of illiterates of any European power, and which strives
sedulously to prevent education where it is possible, and to poison it
where prohibition is impossible.</p>
<p>The war for civilisation is
waged by a nation like Britain which holds in thrall a sixth of the
human race, and holds as a cardinal doctrine of its faith that none of
its subject races may, under penalty of imprisonment and death, dream of
ruling their own territories. A nation which believes that all races are
subject to purchase, and which brands as perfidy the act of any nation
which, like Bulgaria, chooses to carry its wares and its arms to any
other than a British market.</p>
<p>This war for civilisation in the
name of neutrality, and small <pb n="89"/> nationalities invades Persia
and Greece, and in the name of the interests of commerce seizes the
cargo of neutral ships, and flaunts its defiance of neutral flags.</p>
<p>In the name of freedom from militarism it establishes military rule
in Ireland, battling for progress it abolishes trial by jury, and waging
war for enlightened rule it tramples the freedom of the press under the
heel of a military despot.</p>
<p>Is it any wonder then that that
particular war for civilisation arouses no enthusiasm in the ranks of
the toiling masses of the Irish nation?</p>
<p>But there is another war
for civilisation in which these masses are interested. That war is
being waged by the forces of organised labour.</p>
<p>Civilisation
cannot be built upon slaves; civilisation cannot be secured if the
producers are sinking into misery; civilisation is lost if they whose
labour makes it possible share so little of its fruits that its fall can
leave them no worse than its security.</p>
<p>The workers are at the
bottom of civilised society. That civilisation may endure they ought to
push upward from their poverty and misery until they emerge into the
full sunlight of freedom. When the fruits of civilisation, created by
all, are enjoyed in common by all, then civilisation is secure. Not till
then.</p>
<p>Since this European war started the workers as a whole have
been sinking. It is not merely that they have lost in comfort&mdash;have
lost a certain standard of food and clothing by reason of the increase
of prices&mdash;but they have lost in a great measure, in Britain at
least, all those hard won rights of combination and freedom of action,
the possession of which was the foundation upon which they hoped to
build the greater freedom of the future.</p>
<p>From being citizens with
rights the workers were being driven and betrayed into the position of
slaves with duties. Some of them may have been well-paid slaves, but
slavery <pb n="90"/> is not measured by the amount of oats in the feeding
trough to which the slave is tied. It is measured by his loss of control
of the conditions under which he labours.</p>
<p>We here in Ireland,
particularly those who follow the example of the Irish Transport and
General Workers' Union, have been battling to preserve those rights
which others have surrendered; we have fought to keep up our standards
of life, to force up our wages, to better our conditions.</p>
<p>To that
extent we have been truly engaged in a war for civilisation. Every
victory we have gained has gone to increase the security of life amongst
our class, has gone to put bread on the tables, coals in the fires,
clothes on the backs of those to whom food and warmth and clothing are
things of ever pressing moment.</p>
<p>Some of our class have fought
in Flanders and the Dardanelles; the greatest achievement of them all
combined will weigh but a feather in the balance for good compared with
the achievements of those who stayed at home and fought to secure the
rights of the working class against invasion.</p>
<p>The carnival of
murder on the continent will be remembered as a nightmare in the future,
will not have the slightest effect in deciding for good the fate of our
homes, our wages, our hours, our conditions. But the victories of labour
in Ireland will be as footholds, secure and firm, in the upward climb
our class to the fulness and enjoyment of all that labour creates, and
organised society can provide.</p>
<p>Truly, labour alone in these days
is fighting the real <emph>war for civilisation</emph>.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-10-30">October 30, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="91"/>
<div1 n="20" type="article">
<head>For the Citizen Army</head>
<p>The Irish Citizen Army was
founded during the great Dublin Lock-Out of 1913-14, for the purpose of
protecting the working class, and of preserving its right of public
meeting and free association. The streets of Dublin had been covered by
the bodies of helpless men, women, boys and girls brutally batoned by
the uniformed bullies of the British Government.</p>
<p>Three men had
been killed, and one young Irish girl murdered by a scab, and nothing
was done to bring the assassins to justice.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">James Nolan
and John Byrne from injuries during the 1913 baton charges; C. Byrne of
Dun Laoghaire who died after ill-treatment in prison; Alice Brady shot
by an imported <q>free labourer</q> or <q>scab</q>. </note> So since justice did not exist for
us, since the law instead of protecting the rights of the workers was
an open enemy, and since the armed forces of the Crown were unreservedly
at the disposal of the enemies of labour, it was resolved to create our
own army to secure our rights, to protect our members, and to be a
guarantee of our own free progress.</p>
<p>The Irish Citizen Army was
the first publicly organised armed citizen force south of the Boyne. Its
constitution pledged and still pledges its members to work for an Irish
Republic, and for the emancipation of labour. It has ever been foremost
in all national work, and whilst never neglecting its own special
function has always been at the disposal of the forces of Irish nation-
ality for the ends common to all.</p>
<p>Its influence and presence has
kept the peace at all labour meetings since its foundation, and the
knowledge of its existence and of the spirit of its members has
contributed to prevent the employers and the government from pro-
ceeding to extremes against the fighting unions. It has in a true and
real sense added many shillings per week to the pay of the union
members, since it and it alone has prevented the Government doing in
Dublin what it has done in Barry, namely, send soldiers in to <pb n="92"/> do dockers' work during a strike. Nationally it has done much
more.</p>
<p>When the great betrayal was perpetrated on Ireland, and
John Redmond and his followers, aided by all the capitalist press of the
country, joined in a conspiracy to rush the young men of Ireland into
the ranks of the British Army, the first stirring blow struck against
that betrayal was the historic meeting in Stephen's Green on the night
of Redmond's Mansion House fiasco.</p>
<p>Who took the field that night
in spite of the massed battalions the British Army, waiting the word in
every barrack square Dublin? It was the Irish Citizen Army sprang into
the gap, and by its fearless presence gave new heart and hope to the
dismayed and betrayed people of Ireland.</p>
<p>When the first
deportation order was issued to the first victim, Captain Robert
Monteith, who leaped to arms and invited the people of Dublin to hurl
their defiance in the teeth of the Government? Who rallied to the
meeting despite torrents of rain, and in face of the open demonstration
of armed force by the Dublin garrison? Again it was the Irish Citizen
Army.<note n="2" type="END" resp="DR">The deportation order was served on Captain
Monteith, <date value="1914-11-13">November 13, 1914</date>. The
protest meeting was held at Stephen's Green, Sunday, <date value="1914-11-15">November 15</date> and addressed by William O'Brien,
Sean Milroy, William Partridge, Madame Markievicz, P. T. Daly, The
O'Rahilly and Connolly. See <title>Casement's Last
Adventure</title>, Monteith, pp. 26-34.</note></p>
<p>Who on
every occasion on which the enemy has struck his blow at those who stood
for freedom has ever hastened to the side of the victims declaring their
cause to be its own? THE IRISH CITIZEN ARMY!</p>
<p>Who, when the
protest meeting was held in the Phoenix Park under directions of the
Volunteer Committee, were the only armed body to attend and declare
their adhesion to the cause of their imprisoned brothers in arms? THE
IRISH CITIZEN ARMY!</p>
<p>An armed organisation of the Irish working
class is a phenomenon in Ireland. Hitherto the workers of Ireland have
fought as parts of the armies led by their masters, never as members of
an army officered, trained, and inspired by men <pb n="93"/> of their own
class. Now, with arms in their hands, they propose to steer their own
course, to carve their own future.</p>
<p>Neither Home Rule, nor the
lack of Home Rule, will make them lay down their arms.</p>
<p>However it
may be for others, for us of the Citizen Army there is but one
ideal&mdash;an Ireland ruled, and owned, by Irish men and women,
sovereign and independent from the centre to the sea, and flying its own
flag outward over all the oceans.</p>
<p>We cannot be swerved from our
course by honeyed words, lulled into carelessness by freedom to parade
and strut in uniforms, nor betrayed by high-sounding phrases.</p>
<p>The Irish Citizen Army will only co-operate in a forward movement.
The moment that forward movement ceases it reserves to itself the right
to step out of the alignment, and advance by itself if needs be, in an
effort to plant the banner of freedom one reach further towards its
goal&hellip;.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-10-30">October 30, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="94"/>
<div1 n="21" type="article">
<head>Diplomacy</head>
<p>What is diplomacy? It is the name for the business of conducting the
relations between governments. Whatever has to do with the conduct of
international relations is diplomatic, and the art of conducting the
correspondence and of adjusting those relations is diplomacy.</p>
<p>Now, do you understand? The language in which all diplomats carry on
the business throughout the world is French, just as the predominant
language in which trade was conducted internationally until recently was
English.</p>
<p>The nations, that is to say, robbed each other in
English, and fooled each other in French.</p>
<p>The English have
acquired somehow the reputation of being blunt, business-like people,
with a frank, open nature, whereas the history of their dealings with
other people show them to have been the shrewdest masters of the
diplomatic game the world has ever seen.</p>
<p>In Ireland, as their own
State Papers frankly declare, they employed forgery, bribery, and
murder as part of their daily weapons for the subjugation of the
country; in India their own chief apologist, Lord Macaulay, records that
Lord Clive, the founder of their Indian Empire, forged the name of an
Indian patriot to serve the interests of the Empire, and Warren
Hastings, when put on trial for extortion, blackmail, bribery torture,
wholesale plunder, invasion and conquest of neutral states, was proven
guilty but let off scot free on the grounds that he had indulged in
those crimes <emph>for the good of the Empire</emph>.</p>
<p>In Europe the same guileless John Bull has assiduously kept stirring
the pot of international hatreds and jealousies, pitting nations against
nations, and ever fanning the embers of war into consuming flames.
Sometimes he supported subject nations <pb n="95"/> against their
tyrants, sometimes despots against their struggling subjects, sometimes
preached the doctrine of national rights, sometimes (as at the Con-
gress of Vienna, 1815) acted the part of the chief criminal in dividing
and parcelling out ancient nations. Ready to fly to arms to defend the
rights of neutrals, still more ready to trample roughshod over neutral
rights when it served his purpose; ever appealing to God and the Bible,
and always convinced that crimes committed by John Bull became virtues,
and virtuous acts by his enemies became blasphemous mockeries of the
Most High.</p>
<p>British Diplomacy is hypocrisy incarnate, but as every
false prophet comes in odd moments to believe in the truth of his false
doctrine, so John Bull finds Englishmen to honestly believe that which
their rulers unctuously pretend. Hence we have the phenomenon of the
same section of the English people which honestly denounced their
Government's action in betraying Persia to the Russians, quite as
honestly believing in the action of the same Government when it cries
out against the invasion of Belgium.</p>
<p>Cynical onlookers might say
that the rape and betrayal of Persia was regarded as a harmless joke
because it was done by England's ally, but the invasion of Belgium was a
monstrous crime because it was done by England's enemy.</p>
<p>Even if
that were true it would not affect the case. Diplomacy has a code of
honour of its own, has a standard by which it tests all things. That
code has no necessary relation to the moral code, that standard has
nothing to do with the righteousness of any cause.</p>
<p>The diplomat
holds all acts honourable which bring him success, all things are
righteous which serve his ends. If cheating is necessary, he will cheat;
if lying is useful, he will lie; if bribery helps, he will bribe; if
murder serves, he will order murder; if burglary, seduction, arson or
forgery brings success nearer, all and each of these will be done.</p>
<pb n="96"/>
<p>And through it all the diplomat will remain the soul of
honour&mdash;a perfect English gentleman.</p>
<p>You remember the
Morocco case. England, France, and Spain were engaged in a sweet little
plundering expedition to Morocco. Germany thought her interests were
being over-looked, and sent a gunboat. There was nearly a war. Then
England, France and Spain made a treaty, oh, a fine chivalrous, noble
treaty! They agreed to maintain, respect and guarantee the independence
of Morocco. And they showed that treaty to Germany, and Germany was
satisfied.</p>
<p>But there were secret clauses of that treaty which
they did not show to Germany. These secret clauses bound the signatories
to the treaty to divide up and annex the country whose independence the
public clauses of the treaty had pledged them to safeguard. They did not
show these secret clauses to Germany. Oh, no! But Germany found out
about them, and there would have been war but for the fact that the
Germans, though great soldiers, are rotten diplomats.</p>
<p>Just
imagine the situation. When your grocer sells you sand over the counter
for sugar he is a swindler, and you send him to jail unless he escapes
into the Corporation and becomes an Alderman.</p>
<p>But when the
representatives of certain European countries sit down at the table with
those of another, show them the text of a treaty, solemnly assuring them
that it is a correct copy, whilst all the time they have in their
pockets a totally different treaty with clauses entirely opposed to the
copy shown, the swindling representatives are held in high honour by
their governments because it is good diplomacy.</p>
<p>We had the same
game here in Ireland. The Irish public have been shown a copy of a Home
Rule Bill, and Sir Edward Carson has in his pocket a copy of an Amending
Bill which will destroy the Home Rule Bill&mdash;said Amending Bill
having been agreed upon by the same English statesmen who prepared the
Bill it is to destroy.</p>
<pb n="97"/>
<p>That is diplomacy. And the act
of those who pin their faith to the Home Rule Act and ignore the
Amending Bill is&mdash;well, foolery.</p>
<p>We have said the Germans
are rotten diplomats. It sounds strong, and in view of the espousal of
their cause by so many nations in Europe it may seem foolish. But it is
cold fact. The German victories, not excepting the adhesion of Turkey
and Bulgaria, have been military victories, or due to their unques-
tioned military superiority on the field of battle.</p>
<p>Every
dispassionate onlooker in Europe recognises certain facts. They see that
no one of the Allies could stand up a day against Germany, if isolated
from the others.</p>
<p>To put it in the language of a labour dispute:
If Germany struck against Russia the strike would only last a day, and
work would be resumed the next morning on German terms; if Germany
struck against France the dispute might drag out till dinner time, but
if the strike was only against Great Britain the fight would be over by
breakfast time, and the German workmen would be able to finish a
three-quarter day after the row was over.</p>
<p>Now observe. The
onlookers know that the alliance against Germany cannot last, but must
break up as it is made up of so many discordant elements. It is
unnatural, and whether it last a year, or three years, or ten years is
immaterial, break up it will.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Germany is the
one solid factor that must last, which cannot break up, which nature
will hold together. <emph>Victorious or defeated, Germany
will keep together; victorious or defeated, the Allies will break
up</emph>&mdash;and probably quarrel amongst themselves.</p>
<p>Common
sense then sends the neutral nations to Germany's side, and despite the
magnificent left wing of the daily press there they will remain. Or to
put it in another way. The most magnificent military force ill the war
is the one that by nature <pb n="98"/> will remain a constant undivided
factor in the future, and on the other side is an impotent military
force under different commands, with divided allegiances, and with
divergent interests.</p>
<p>Who could hesitate? No, the victories of
Germany are military victories, not diplomatic ones. If Germany had to
depend on her diplomacy she would be defeated. She had one great chance
to declare war with the public opinion of Europe on her side, and with
the sympathies of Ireland so enlisted, that not all the lying press nor
crawling parliamentarians could have turned this country against
her.</p>
<p>That chance came when the Mail boats for America ceased to
call at Queenstown. Certain patriotic Irishmen persuaded a German
steamship company&mdash;The Hamburg-America line we believe&mdash;to
announce that it was about to make Queenstown a port of call so that
Ireland would still maintain her communication with America. Everything
was ready, and all Ireland was excited over the prospect. But British
diplomacy stepped in and intimated to the German government that it
would consider it an unfriendly act if the company in question sent in
its boats to Ireland.</p>
<p>The German Government gave orders for the
arrangements to be cancelled, and Ireland was once more shut out from
all regular foreign intercourse, and its people restricted to the
necessity of going to England when they wanted to go somewhere
else&mdash;of going east when they wanted to go west, north, or
south.</p>
<p>If Germany had not been a bungling fool at diplomacy it
would have fought on that question&mdash;fought on the right to assist
the people of Ireland, to trade with the people of Ireland, to carry
goods to and from the people of Ireland. But the peace-loving German
Emperor shrank from the quarrel, not realising that from that moment
every agency in the British Government was alert to seize every
opportunity to precipitate <pb n="99"/> a quarrel upon some point not so
dangerously appealing to Irish sympathies for German arms as a quarrel
over Queenstown would have been.</p>
<p>The pretext for this war is a
real humiliation for German diplomacy, as real as the war itself is a
triumph for German arms. German arms will win this war, but we would not
be surprised to see British diplomacy pluck the fruits of victory from
the dust of military defeat. Ireland and Ireland alone could prevent
that, but Ireland has the brand of the slave on her brow&mdash;numbing
fear of the tyrant in her soul. <q>The British Ambassadors at Paris</q>,
said Andrew Jackson after the war of 1812, <q>threw dust in the eyes of
our United States envoys, but they could not throw dust in the eyes of
my Texas riflemen at New Orleans</q>.</p>
<p>Can Ireland burst through
the wiles of British diplomacy in like manner? Who shall answer?</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-11-06">November 6, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="100"/>
<div1 n="22" type="article">
<head>Recruiting the Irish Citizen Army</head>
<p><add resp="DR">During a dispute between the shipping companies and their men
at the Dublin Docks in the autumn of 1915 a large number of workers were
locked out. Connolly in the <title>Workers' Repub-
lic</title>, <date value="1915-11-06">November 6, 1915</date>,
showed how this was turned to the advantage of the Irish Citizen
Army:</add> <text>
<body>
<p>A large section has been formed for drill,
and every day the men are instructed in military exercises. We are thus
rapidly becoming the best drilled body of men in Ireland. For a time it
was difficult to get our men trained, as dock work keeps men employed
always in the evenings, but the employers are kindly helping us to get
over that difficulty. Company after company locks out its men, and then
we bring them up to Liberty Hall and take advantage of the opportunity
to drill and train them. When each dispute is settled that squad of men
goes back to work, and some other squad gets locked out, and we get a
chance to train <emph>them</emph>.</p>
<p>Thus the whole quay
is getting drilled, and the Irish Citizen Army has a larger reserve of
drilled fighting men than any force in Dublin. It is a great game! And
all these men are ready to fight&mdash;in Ireland. Perhaps that is not
what the employers are aiming at. Perhaps. But every musketry instructor
can tell you that people often hit what they did not aim at. The great
danger is that the dispute may be over before the men are thoroughly
drilled. And when it is over the men will be back to work at the same
rates of pay as their brothers have been conceded. And not a penny
less.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-11-06">November 6, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="101"/>
<div1 n="23" type="article">
<head>Ireland disaffected or revolutionary?</head>
<cecinit>
<lg type="fragment">
<l>Youth of
Ireland, stand prepared,</l>
<l>Revolution's dread abyss</l>
<l>Burns
beneath us all but bared&hellip;.</l>
</lg>
</cecinit>
<p>So sang Clarence Mangan in the days of '48. But he sang in vain. The
music of his verse charmed the cultured intellect of the leaders, but
could not break through their refined distrust of the mob, nor inspire
them with a confidence in its willingness to respond to the call. And
the verse of Mangan never appealed to the emotions of the mob
itself.<note n="1" type="end" resp="auth"> <pb n="105"/> <q>No revolutionary
movement is complete without its poetical expression. If such a movement
has caught hold of the imagination of the masses, they will seek a vent
in song for the aspirations, the fears and hopes, the loves and hatreds
engendered by the struggle. Until the movement is marked by the joyous, defiant, singing of revolutionary songs, it lacks one of the most
distinctive marks of a popular revolutionary movement; it is a dogma
of a few, and not the faith of the multitude.</q>  <add resp="DR">Connolly in <bibl>Introduction, <title>Songs of Freedom</title>, New York, <date>1907</date>.</bibl> The quotation in the succeeding
paragraph is from Lissagaray's <title>History of the
Commune of 1871</title>, and refers to the attitude of Louis Blanc
and other veterans of the 1848 revolution to the Paris
Commune.</add></note></p>
<p>The revolutionary position was there, the
people were ready, but the leaders were lacking in dash and
recklessness. As another writer has it of another body of leaders
similarly situated: <text>
<body>
<p>Having all their lives sung of the
glories of the Revolution, when it rose up before them they ran away
appalled.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<p>These reflections are inspired by
the fact that Ireland is at present in the midst of a number of
anniversaries of the great days of its patriot dead. On all hands
celebrations are being or have been arranged, much oratory is on tap,
many verses of more or less merit are pouring forth, and all sorts of
men and women are drawing lessons and pointing morals for the
edification of the Irish reading public.</p>
<p>It is felt that we are
now in stirring times, and many people dare even to hope that we are in
a revolutionary epoch. It is well then that we of the Irish working
class should try and understand the position of the revolutionists of
the past, that we may the better realise our position in the
present.</p>
<p>We do not believe that this is a revolutionary epoch, no
more than the days of Mitchel were revolutionary in Ireland, <pb n="102"/> nor the days of Allen, Larkin and O'Brien. An epoch, to be
truly revolutionary, must have a dominating number of men with the
revolutionary spirit&mdash;ready to dare all, and take all risks for the
sake of their ideals.</p>
<p>In 1848, as later, there were men who
talked much of revolution, but when the spirit of the times called upon
them to strike they all began to make excuses, to murmur about the
danger of premature insurrection, of incomplete preparations, of the
awful responsibility of giving the word for insurrection, etc., etc.</p>
<p>In 1848, as later, the real revolutionary sentiment was in the hearts
of the people, but for the most part they who undertook to give it
articulate expression were wanting in the essential ability to translate
sentiment into action. They would have been good historians of a
revolutionary movement, but were unable to take that leap in the dark
which all men must take who plunge into insurrection. For, be it well
understood, an insurrection is always doubtful, a thousand to one chance
always exists in favour of the established order and against the
insurgents.</p>
<p>Despite all seeming to the contrary we assert that
Ireland is not a really revolutionary country. Ireland is a disaffected
country which has long been accustomed to conduct constitutional
agitations in revolutionary language, and what is worse, to conduct
revolutionary movements with a due regard to law and order.</p>
<p>Our
constitutionalists have been ready to defy the law; our revolutionists
shine only in legal quirks to evade the letter of the law. The
constitutional agitation of the Land League was one prolonged riot of
illegality; the revolutionary movement of our own day shrinks from an
openly illegal act as nervously as a coy maiden shrinks from a desired
lover.</p>
<p>It is this paradoxical state of affairs that makes Irish
politics so puzzling to the outsider. He listens to the politician
appealing to the people to cling to constitutional methods, and at the
same time exulting in the agrarian reforms gained by trampling <pb n="103"/> law and order under foot. He hears the revolutionists telling
that England's difficulty is Ireland's opportunity, and then, when her
greatest difficulty comes, postponing action on the opportunity in order
to see if the politician cannot yet succeed by legal agitation.<note n="2" type="end" resp="DR">Referring to rumoured German peace proposals published in the
American Press, Connolly asks in the <title>Workers'
Republic</title>, <date value="1915-12-11">December 11,
1915</date>: <q>Where does Ireland come in? Why should Ireland come in?
What has she done to deserve separate discussion in the peace terms</q>?
Earlier in the same article Connolly says ironically: <q>Since the time
of O'Connell we have suffered from a peculiar blend of constitutionalism
and a mild form of insurrectionism. It might be said with a grain and
more than a grain of truth, that our rebel hearts sought articulation
through our constitutional mouths, and the sentiments of the rebel heart
got distorted in the passage to the lips. Our constitutionalism never
loves the Empire, and our rebellion fired no shots at it in anger. Who
is to blame? Is anyone to blame? Is the fault in our leaders or in
ourselves? Or must we in fatalistic Irish fashion just thank God we are
no worse</q>?</note></p>
<p>In his brilliant lecture on John Mitchel
in the Antient Concert Rooms, on Thursday, <date value="1915-11-04">November 4th</date>, our friend Mr. P. H. Pearse
treated his audience to a splendid review of the tendencies of opinions
and movement of currents of thought, that applied so well to our own
days that many of the audience forgot that it was an analysis of '48 to
which they were listening or supposed to be listening. It is that very
similarity which enables us to so clearly understand the nature of the
forces that destroyed Mitchel.</p>
<p>The British Government would not
wait until the plans of the revolutionists were ready. It has not held
Ireland down for 700 years by any such foolish waiting. It struck in its
own time, and its blow paralysed the people. The leaders of the people
would not follow Mitchel's lead but held the people back by talk about
<q>premature insurrection</q>, and <q>the desire of the Government to
provoke us to act before we are ready</q>, and such like phrases
repeated glibly, with the solemnity of fools and the foolishness of
idiots, until the golden moment of hot wrath was passed, and the
paraders and the strutters had lost the confidence and destroyed the
hopes of the nation.</p>
<p>In vain for Clarence Mangan to call to such
a people to prepare for revolution. Revolutionists who shrink from
giving blow for blow until the great day has arrived, and they have
every shoe-string in its place, and every man has got his gun, and the
enemy has kindly consented to postpone action in order not to needlessly
hurry the revolutionists nor disarrange their plans&mdash;such
revolutionists only exist in two places&mdash;the comic opera stage, and
the stage of Irish national politics. We prefer the comic opera brand.
It at least serves its purpose.</p>
<pb n="104"/>
<p>John Mitchel was not
defeated by the British Government. He was defeated by his own
associates. There are no John Mitchels left in Ireland, but of such as
those who held lack the hands of the people who would have rescued him
there are still a goodly brood&mdash;all of them as legally seditious,
as peacefully revolutionary, and as fatal to the hopes of a nation as
ever were their fore-runners.</p>
<p>O, we latter-day Irish are great
orators, and great singers, and great reciters, and great at cheering
heroic sentiments about revolution. But we are not revolutionists. Not
by a thousand miles!<note n="3" type="end" resp="auth"><q>The governing classes can declare
unconstitutional whatever political movements they do not like. Knowing
this, many Irishmen ran into secret societies in order to satisfy their
hatred of the Constitution. It is against the Constitution to join a
republican secret society. But it is also against the Constitution to
keep a dog without a licence. The romance which might attach to the
former act is cruelly dissipated by the reflection that the law is as
remorseless in hunting down the offender in the latter</q>. <bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1898-09-09">September 9, 1898</date>.</bibl></note> Soldiers of a regular army
we can be, soldiers with a well-secured base from which our provisions
can come up with clock-like regularity, soldiers with our relatives and
dependents securely drawing separation allowances, soldiers with an
ambulance service working automatically according to railway time table,
soldiers with unlimited reserves of ammunition, arms, and uniforms. For
that kind of war we are ready, aye, ready.</p>
<p>But no revolution in
history ever had any of these things. None ever will have. Hence we
strictly confine ourselves to killing John Bull with our mouths.</p>
<p>We have opened this week with a quotation from our own Irish
poet&mdash;an impassioned, soul-felt appeal to the heart of a nation
whose heart was greater than the spirit of its leaders. We shall close
with the words of another poet, an American, a trumpet call to his
people on the occasion of a crisis in his nation's history. It would be
well if it were laid to heart in Ireland to-day: <text>
<body>
<p>Once to
every man and nation comes the moment to decide&hellip;.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-11-13">November 13, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="106"/>
<div1 n="24" type="article">
<head>The Manchester Martyrs</head>
<p>This week we are celebrating another anniversary. But
it is of a different order to the anniversary of which we spoke of in
our last number. That anniversary was of one of Ireland's
thinkers&mdash;a defiant rebel and preacher of rebellion, but one whose
rebellion never got further than the spoken or written word. A thinker
and initiator amidst mindless slaves&mdash;a scorner and hater of
orthodox formulae amidst men who could not think even of rebellion
except according to formula, and who refused to rebel because some of
the ingredients of their formula were lacking.</p>
<p>This week our
Anniversary is not of thinkers, but of doers, of men who when a duty was
to be done did not stop to think, but acted, and by their action
violated every rule of prudence, sanity, and caution, and in violating
them all obeyed the highest dictates of wisdom and achieved
immortality.</p>
<p>THE MANCHESTER MARTYRS! Who were they? A few words
will tell.</p>
<p>Two members of the Fenian organisation&mdash;Kelly and
Deasy&mdash;were trapped in Manchester, and lay awaiting trial in an
English prison. The Fenians in that city resolved to rescue them. This
they did by stopping the prison van upon the road between Manchester and
Salford, breaking open the van, shooting a policeman in the act, and
carrying off their comrades under the very eyes of the English
authorities.</p>
<p>Out of a number of men arrested for complicity in
the deed, three were hanged. These three were ALLEN, LARKIN and
O'BRIEN&mdash;the three Manchester Martyrs whose memory we honour
to-day. Why do we honour them?</p>
<p>We honour them because of their
heroic souls. Let us remember that by every test by which parties in
Ireland to-day measure <pb n="107"/> political wisdom, or personal
prudence, the act of these men ought to be condemned. They were in a
hostile city, surrounded by a hostile population; they were playing into
the hands of the Government by bringing all the Fenians out in broad
daylight to be spotted and remembered; they were discouraging the Irish
people by giving them another failure to record; they had no hopes of
foreign help even if their brothers in Ireland took the field spurred by
their action; at the most their action would only be an Irish riot in an
English city; and finally, they were imperilling the whole organisation
for the sake of two men. These were all the sound sensible arguments of
the prudent, practical politicians and theoretical revolutionists. But
<q>how beggarly appear words before a defiant deed</q>!</p>
<p>The
Fenians of Manchester rose superior to all the whines about prudence,
caution and restraint, and saw only two of their countrymen struck at
for loyalty to freedom, and seeing this, struck back at the enemy with
blows that are still resounding through the heart of the world. The echo
of those blows has for a generation been as a baptismal dedication to
the soul and life of thousands of Irish men and women, consecrating them
to the service of freedom.</p>
<p>Had Kelly and Deasy been struck at
in our time, we would not have startled the world by the vehemence of
our blow in return; we would not have sent out the call for a muster of
our hosts to peril all in their rescue. No, we would simply have
instructed our typist to look up the office files and see if they had
paid up their subscription in the <on type="insurance society">Cumann
Cosanta</on>,<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">An Insurance Society run by the
Irish Volunteers to safeguard its members against
victimisation.</note> and were entitled to their insurance
benefit.</p>
<p>Thus we have progressed in the path of civilised
methods, far, far away from the undisciplined hatred and reckless
fighting of the '67 men. MORYAH!</p>
<p>ALLEN, LARKIN and O'BRIEN died
that the right of their small nationality to independence might be
attested by <pb n="108"/> their blood died that some day an Irish
Republic might live. The song of their martyrdom was written by a man
who had laboured hard to prevent the fruition of their hopes; the prayer
of their last moments has become the hackneyed catch-word of every
political Judas seeking to betray their cause. Everything associated
with them has been stolen or corrupted, except the imperishable example
of their <q>defiant deed</q>. Of that neither men,
devils, nor doubters can deprive us.</p>
<p>Oh, the British Empire is
great and strong and powerful compared with Ireland. 'Tis true that
compared with Germany the Empire is a doddering old miser confronted
with a lusty youth&mdash;a miser whose only hope is to purchase the
limbs and bodies of others to protect her stolen properties. 'Tis true
that the Empire cannot stand up alone to <emph>any</emph>
European power, that she must have allies or perish. 'Tis true that
even with allies her military and financial system is cracking at every
point, sweating blood in fear at every pore. But still all the stolen
property that England possesses our Irish forefathers have helped to
steal, and we are helping to defend.</p>
<p>Was it wise then, or
commendable, for the men of '67 to rebel against the Empire that their
and our fathers have helped to build or steal? There are thousands of
answers to that question, but let the European battlefields of to-day
provide the one all-sufficient answer.</p>
<p>All these mountains of
Irish dead, all these corpses mangled beyond recognition, all these
arms, legs, eyes, ears, fingers, toes, hands, all these shivering
putrefying bodies and portion of bodies&mdash;once warm living and
tender parts of Irish men and youths&mdash;all these horrors buried in
Flanders or the Gallipoli Peninsula, are all items in the price Ireland
pays for being part the British Empire. All these widows whose husbands
were torn from their sides and forced to go to war, their prayers, and
tears for the ones who will return no more, are another part of the
price of Empire. All those fatherless orphans, who <pb n="109"/> for the
last time have heard the cheery laugh of an affectionate father, and who
must for years suffer all the bitter hardships of a childhood poorly
provided for against want and hunger&mdash;all those and their misery
are part of the price Ireland pays for Empire. All those shattered,
maimed and diseased wrecks of humanity who for years will crowd our
poorhouses and asylums, or crawl along our roads and streets affronting
our health by their wounds, and our comfort by their appeals for
charity&mdash;all, all are part of the price Ireland pays for the glory
of being an integral part of the British Empire.</p>
<p>And for what do
we pay this price? Answer, ye practical ones! Ye men of sense, of
prudence, of moderation, of business capacity!</p>
<p>Ireland is rotten
with slums, a legacy of Empire. The debt of this war will prevent us
from getting money to replace them with sound clean, healthy homes.
Every big gun fired in the Dardanelles fired away at every shot the cost
of building a home for a working class family. Ireland has the most
inefficient educational system, and the poorest schools in Europe.
Empire compels us to pay pounds for blowing out the brains of others for
every farthing it allows us with which to train our own.</p>
<p>An
Empire on which the sun never sets cannot guarantee its men and women as
much comfort as is enjoyed by the every-day citizen of the smallest,
least military nation in Europe. Nations that know not the power and
possessions of Empire have happier, better educated<corr resp="DMD" sic="">,</corr> better housed, better equipped, men and women than
Ireland has ever known, or can ever know as an integral part of the
British Empire.</p>
<p>The British Empire is a piratical enterprise in
which the valour of slaves fights for the glory and profit of their
masters. The Home Rule Party aspire to be trusted accomplices of that
conspiracy, the Manchester Martyrs were its unyielding foes even to the
dungeon and the scaffold. Therefore we honour <pb n="110"/> the memory of
the Manchester Martyrs. As future generations shall honour them.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-11- 20">November 20, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="111"/>
<div1 n="25" type="article">
<head>Conscription</head>
<p>We see that the time is now here
when it may be very dangerous to talk of opposing conscription in
Ireland, and yet that opposition must be organised, and to be organised
it must be discussed.</p>
<p>It is to be hoped that whatever discussion
takes place now, those taking part in it will recognise that the time
has gone past for smooth-sounding generalities, or mere political
make-believe. We are now living in an era of ruthless brute force of
blood and iron. Whatever effect public opinion may have in times of
peace it has little practical effect in time of war. In times of peace
human life weighs heavily in the balance, and the most brutal of our
rulers shrink from too readily shedding human blood. But in time of war
all such considerations vanish, and the spilling of a torrent of blood
in the city streets would cause the ruling class no more compunction
than the slaughter of game on their estates.</p>
<p>Indeed that lesson
has been all too tardily learned by the people and their leaders. One
great source of the strength of the ruling class has ever been their
willingness to kill in defence of their power and privileges. Let their
power be once attacked either by foreign foes, or domestic
revolutionists, and at once we see the rulers prepared to kill, and
kill, and kill. The readiness of the ruling class to order killing, the
small value the ruling class has ever set upon human life, is in marked
contrast to the reluctance of all revolutionists to shed blood.</p>
<p>The French Reign of Terror is spoken of with horror and execration by
the people who talk in joyful praise about the mad adventure of the
Dardanelles. And yet in any one day of battle at the Dardanelles there
were more lives lost than in all the nine months of the Reign of
Terror.</p>
<pb n="112"/>
<p>Should the day ever come when revolutionary
leaders are prepared to sacrifice the lives of those under them as
recklessly as the ruling class do in every war, there will not be a
throne or despotic government left in the world. Our rulers reign by
virtue of their readiness to destroy human life in order to reign; their
reign will end on the day their discontented subjects care as little for
the destruction of human life as they do.</p>
<p>Hence they who now
would oppose conscription must not delude themselves into the belief
that they are simply embarking upon a new form of political agitation,
with no other risks than attend political agitation in times of
peace.</p>
<p>We will not be asked to accept conscription by the British
Government unless the British ruling class has made up its mind that
only conscription can save the Empire. If it does make up its mind to
that measure it will enforce conscription though every river in Ireland
ran red with blood.</p>
<p>The people of Ireland have been so long
accustomed to temporising, and evading straight issues, that there is
great danger that they may fail to recognise the gravity of their
action, and attempt to fight conscription as they would attempt a cattle
drive, or the making of poteen. That is to say in the spirit of a joke
at the expense of the police.</p>
<p>Such an attempt in such a spirit
would fare badly against a drastic resolve of the military to <q>make an example</q> of the first conscripts who refused
to obey. A round dozen corpses of young Irishmen would strike terror
into thousands, but would not affect the appetites of those who daily
order to their death thousands of young men in the prime of life and
vigour.</p>
<p>Oppose conscription, by all means, but let us not teach
those who look to us for leadership that such opposition can be
conducted on the lines of dodging the police, or any such high jinks
of constitutional agitation. Those who oppose it take their lives in
their hands. Let them be made to realise that in advance. A fool, and
ten thousand times worse than a fool, <pb n="113"/> is he who would teach
them otherwise. Our rulers will <q>stop at nothing</q>
to attain their ends. They will continue to rule and rob until
confronted by men who will stop at nothing to overthrow them.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-11-27">November 27, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="114"/>
<div1 n="26" type="article">
<head><q>Trust Your Leaders</q>!</head>
<p>Trust your leaders! Recently we have been treated to a homily upon the above text.
Trust your leaders; what do you know of their plans and resources, or
what amount of confidential information they may possess that is denied
to the rank and file? That is good advice. We endorse it thoroughly;
agree with it in every essential. Your leaders have a right to your
confidence. Let them know that you will obey them&mdash;that is one kind
of confidence. Let them know what the rank and file are thinking and
saying&mdash;that is another sign of your confidence.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">Connolly here replies to an article in <title>The Spark</title>, <date value="1915-11-28">November 28, 1915</date>, <title>Courage under Control</title>, believed to
have been written or inspired by a member of the Irish Volunteer
Executive. It was clearly an answer to Connolly's Manchester Martyrs
articles. One sentence runs: <q>When the enemy deports an organiser or
hauls down a sign on Liberty Hall</q>.</note></p>
<p>The last is the
most sacred kind of confidence. It is the confidence you only give to a
loved friend, a friend whom you love so much that even at the risk of
wounding his feelings you are prepared, for his sake as well as your
own, to challenge his judgment and impeach his wisdom. That is the
highest kind of confidence&mdash;the most sacred kind of trust.</p>
<p>If you are adventuring under a leader of proven judgment in the task
you both have set out to perform, do not question his judgment rashly.
But if his experience is no more than yours&mdash;his judgment untested,
and his experience nil, do not leave him to flounder along without
that saving criticism which must in peace provide the only possible
substitute for the terrible punishment with which mistaken judgment is
visited in war. If you do, you are untrue to him, to yourself, and above
all to the common cause. <q>Teach them, O Lord</q>, said a French
writer, <q>that in the haven of Liberty there are neither heroes nor
great men</q>.</p>
<p>In Ireland, however, we have ever seized upon
mediocrities and made them our leaders; invested them in our minds with
all the qualities we idealised, and then when we discovered <pb n="115"/>
that our leaders were not heroes but only common mortals, mediocrities,
we abused them, or killed them, for failing to be any better than God
made them.</p>
<p>Their failure dragged us down along with them because
we had insisted that they were wiser than we were, and had stoned
whoever declared them to be common mortals, and not all-wise geniuses.
Our real geniuses and inspired apostles we never recognised, nor did we
honour them. We killed them by neglect, or stoned them whilst they
lived, and then went in reverent procession to their graves when they
were dead.</p>
<p>We are raising our voice, or using our pen, to insist
upon taking the military leaders of the Irish people into our
confidence; to ask our readers to insist likewise that if the rank and
file must obey, so also is it true that the leaders must listen. We see
neither heroes nor great men amongst these leaders, and we are devoutly
thankful that it is so. Being common mortals like ourselves we shall
refuse to invest them with the super-sanctity of gods or the wisdom and
foresight of prophets. And above all we refuse, and we counsel all
others to refuse, to assume that our policies for Ireland in this crisis
are identical until we know that they are. At a time when all they hold
dear trembles in the balance, should the armed citizens of Ireland fall
in behind leaders without questioning what are the policies of those
leaders, or what their outlook upon the immediate future?</p>
<p>We do
not call for public pronouncements from them, but every man is the
guardian of his own conscience and responsible to that conscience if he
shirks his duty to his country and its cause. By your choice of a leader
now you make your choice of the part you shall play in the hour of
destiny. How can you make that choice wisely if you do not <emph>know</emph> what that leader's policy for the future is?</p>
<p>Do not be deceived, nor deceive yourself by words. For instance, when
you hear that some one will <q>fight conscription</q>,<pb n="116"/>
 push the question until you find out what he means by <q>fighting</q> conscription.</p>
<p>The Quakers in England
will fight conscription, the Dukhobors of Russia will fight
conscription, the <q>No Conscription Fellowship</q> is
already fighting conscription. But no blows are or will be struck by
them&mdash;indeed their <q>fighting</q> consists in
refusing to strike blows. Is that your method, or that of your leaders?
Or do you prefer the method of that Catholic priest who recently
advised his people to send a deputation of their ten best shots to meet
the conscriptors? Words are said to be the medium by which we express
our ideas, but in Ireland words are generally the means by which we
conceal our ideas. Do not let them be so used in this great game now
being played.</p>
<p>It is poor quibbling to say that the <title>Workers' Republic</title> stands for reckless
fighting and ill-considered action. It does not. The <title>Workers' Republic</title> holds that at any
time since the war broke out the British Government could have been
halted in its inroads upon public liberties in Ireland by a flat refusal
on the part of the majority of its armed citizens to allow their rights
as citizens to be interfered with.</p>
<p>It needed no insurrection, no
flying to arms, no storming of jails, it only needed that the armed
Volunteers who claimed to stand for Ireland should mobilise and speak
for Ireland. And so speaking should declare that they would not
demobilise until all orders of deportation were withdrawn, and full
liberty accorded to the Irish Volunteers to organise under their own
chosen officers. Not a troop would have been moved against them, nor a
shot fired. The competent military authority would have been repudiated
as readily as was the gentleman responsible for ordering out the
military on Howth Sunday.</p>
<p>Does anyone imagine that at that period
of Captain Robert Monteith's deportation, when everything was going
wrong with England, that she would have hesitated to sacrifice her <pb n="117"/> dignity or swallow an affront, rather than provoke in Ireland a
conflict that she knew would have tested severely the loyalty of the
reserves newly recalled to the colours? Just as Redmond could have
gained Home Rule by refusing to speak in the House of Commons until he
had called a Convention in Ireland upon the outbreak of the war, so the
leaders of the Irish Volunteers could have prevented the flowing over
this island of the wave of military despotism by quietly challenging its
force when first it broke upon us. But neither had the requisite
imagination. Both essayed to grapple a revolutionary situation with the
weapons of a constitutional agitation.</p>
<p>The tyranny we have since
suffered under has been progressive in its virulence. At first it was
only Government employees like Captain Monteith who were arrested or
deported, now it is any civilian under any conceivable circumstance.
Tyranny grows with what it feeds upon.</p>
<p>We are told that the
arrest of our leaders would justify action. Our leaders would have
been arrested long ago were it not for the fact that at the protest
meeting held by the Citizen Army against the deportation of Captain
Monteith it was declared by the chief speaker that the arrest of the
Volunteer leaders would be a proof to their followers that the British
had been defeated at sea, or that the Germans had landed. Fear lest the
people of Ireland should so interpret their arrest has spared them to us
up till now.<note n="2" type="end" resp="DR">See note 2, to article <title>For the Citizen Army</title>. <title>Irish Times</title>, <date value="1914-11-16">November 16, 1914</date>, quoted <title>Casement's
Last Adventure</title>, p. 34, reports Connolly as saying, <q>If
there was a landing of Germans in England or Ireland, ten minutes after
that landing, every Volunteer officer, every leader of rebel tendencies
would be sent away to <pb n="119"/> Mountjoy or Arbour Hill. Any such
wholesale arrest of leaders would be proof that the British Empire was
tottering to its destruction</q>.</note></p>
<p>We believe in
constitutional action in normal times; we believe in revolutionary
action in exceptional times. These are exceptional times.</p>
<p>When
General Friend took down the sign from over Liberty Hall he did not do
so in order to provoke us to insurrection. He calculated that a body of
100 armed men would scarcely spring to arms at such an insult after a
body of 5,000 armed men had submitted meekly to a greater one in the
same city. His calculation was right. Had the numbers been changed <pb n="118"/> his calculation might have missed. We acquit the competent
military authority of any intention to provoke a revolt. But we are glad
that it was not a Labour paper that pointed out to him that he could at
any time provoke a revolt by seizing the leaders of the Volunteers. We
are sure that he is grateful for the suggestion, but we do not believe
that he needed it.<note n="3" type="end" resp="DR">General Friend ordered the removal from
the front of Liberty Hall of Connolly's famous streamer, <q>We serve
neither King nor Kaiser but Ireland</q>. It was removed quietly when the
Hall was deserted in the small hours by several policemen who fixed an
official notice to the front door, stating action had been taken under
General Friend's orders.</note></p>
<p>What do you think of the
wisdom of those who tell you to be patient and trust your leaders whose
plans you do not understand, but if those leaders are arrested, fly to
arms? If your leaders who alone have plans are arrested your flying to
arms will be that of a leaderless mob in a planless insurrection. And
you know, don't you, that the same voices who talk thus of flying to
arms, would then talk of waiting until your new leaders would have made
new plans to meet the new situation? Finally: think over this chunk of
wisdom. A revolutionist who surrenders the initiative to the enemy is
already defeated before a blow is struck. It is a fine day if it wasn't
for the rain.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-12-04">December 4, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="120"/>
<div1 n="27" type="article">
<head>Economic Conscription</head>
<div2 n="1" type="section">
<p>Of late we have been
getting accustomed to this new phrase, economic conscription, or the
policy of forcing men into the army by depriving them of the means of
earning a livelihood. In Canada it is called hunger-scription. In
essence it consists of a recognition of the fact that the working class
fight the battles of the rich, that the rich control the jobs or means
of existence of the working class, and that therefore if the rich desire
to dismiss men eligible for military service they can compel these men
to enlist&mdash;or starve.</p>
<p>Looking still deeper into the question
it is a recognition of the truth that the control of the means of life
by private individuals is the root of all tyranny, national, political,
militaristic, and that therefore they who control the jobs control the
world. Fighting at the front to-day there are many thousands whose whole
soul revolts against what they are doing, but who must nevertheless
continue fighting and murdering because they were deprived of a living
at home, and compelled to enlist that those dear to them may not
starve.</p>
<p>Thus under the forms of political freedom the souls of
men are subjected to the cruellest tyranny in the world&mdash;recruiting
has become a great hunting party which the souls and bodies of men as
the game to be hunted and trapped.</p>
<p>Every day sees upon the
platform the political representatives of the Irish people, busily
engaged in destroying the souls, that they might be successful in
hunting and capturing the bodies of Irishmen for sale to the English
armies. And every day we feel all around us in the workshop, in the
yard, at the docks, in the stables, wherever men are employed, the same<pb n="121"/>
 economic pressure, the same unyielding relentless force,
driving, driving, driving men out from home and home life to fight
abroad that the exploiters may rule and rob at home. The downward path
to hell is easy once you take the first step.</p>
<p>The first step in
the economic conscription of Irishmen was taken when the employers of
Dublin locked their workpeople out in 1913 for daring to belong to the
Irish Transport and General Workers' Union. Does that statement astonish
you? Well, consider it. In 1913 the employers of Dublin used the weapons
of starvation to try and compel men and women to act against their
conscience. In 1915 the employers of Dublin and Ireland in general are
employing the weapon of starvation in order to compel men to act
against their conscience. The same weapon, the same power derived from
the same source.</p>
<p>At the first anti-conscription meeting in the
City Hall of Dublin we heard an employer declaim loudly against the
iniquity of compelling men to act against their conscience. And yet in
1913 the same employer had been an active spirit in encouraging his
fellow-employers to starve a whole countryside in order to compel men
and women to act against their conscience.</p>
<p>The great lock-out in
1913-14 was an apprenticeship in brutality&mdash;a hardening of the
heart of the Irish employing class&mdash;whose full acts we are only
reaping to-day in the persistent use of the weapon of hunger to compel
men to fight for a power they hate, and to abandon a land that they
love.</p>
<p>If here and there we find an occasional employer who fought
us in 1913 agreeing with our national policy in 1915 it is not because
he has become converted, or is ashamed of the unjust use of his
powers, but simply that he does not see in economic conscription the
profit he fancied he saw in denying to his labourers the right to
organise in their own way in 1913.</p>
<p>Do we find fault with the
employer for following his own interests? We do not. But neither are we
under any illusion <pb n="122"/> as to his motives. In the same manner we
take our stand with our own class, nakedly upon our class interests, but
believing that these interests are the highest interests of the
race.</p>
<p>We cannot conceive of a free Ireland with a subject working
class; we cannot conceive of a subject Ireland with a free working
class. But we can conceive of a free Ireland with a working class
guaranteed the power of freely and peacefully working out its own
salvation.</p>
<p>We do not believe that the existence of the British
Empire is compatible with either the freedom or security of the Irish
working class. That freedom and that security can only come as a result
of complete absence of foreign domination. Freedom to control all its
own resources is as essential to a community as to an individual. No
individual can develop all his powers if he is even partially under the
control of another, even if that other sincerely wishes him well. The
powers of the individual can only be developed properly when he has to
bear the responsibility of all his own actions, to suffer for his
mistakes, and to profit by his achievements.</p>
<p>Man, as man, only
arrived at the point at which he is to-day as a result of thousands of
years of strivings with nature. In his stumblings forward along the ages
he was punished for every mistake. Nature whipped him with cold, with
heat, with hunger, with disease, and each whipping helped him to know
what to avoid, and what to preserve.</p>
<p>The first great forward step
of man was made when he understood the relation between cause and
effect&mdash;understood that a given action produced and must produce a
given result. That no action could possibly be without an effect, that
the problem of his life was to find out the causes which produced the
effects injurious to him, and having found them out to overcome or make
provision against them.</p>
<p>Just as the whippings of nature produced
the improvements in the life habits of man, so the whippings naturally
following <pb n="123"/> upon social or political errors are the only
proper safeguards for the proper development of nationhood.</p>
<p>No
nation is worthy of independence until it is independent. No nation is
fit to be free until it is free. No man can swim until he has entered
the water and failed and been half drowned several times in the attempt
to swim.</p>
<p>A free Ireland would make dozens of mistakes, and every
mistake would cost it dear, and strengthen it for future efforts. But
every time it, by virtue of its own strength, remedied a mistake it
would take a long step forward towards security. For security can only
come to a nation by a knowledge of some power within itself, some
difficulty overcome by a strength which no robber can take away.</p>
<p>What is that of which no robber can deprive us The answer is,
experience. Experience in freedom would strengthen us in power to attain
security. Security would strengthen us in our progress towards greater
freedom.</p>
<p>Ireland is not the Empire, the Empire is not Ireland.
Anything in Ireland that depends upon the Empire depends upon that which
the fortunes of war <emph>may</emph> destroy at any moment,
depends upon that which the progress of enlightenment <emph>must</emph> destroy in the near future. The people of India,
of Egypt, cannot be forever enslaved.</p>
<p>Anything in Ireland that
depends upon the internal resources of Ireland has a basis and
foundation which no disaster to the British Empire can destroy, which
disasters to the British Empire may conceivably cause to flourish.</p>
<p>The security of the working class of Ireland then has the same roots
as the security of the people of Ireland as a whole. The roots are in
Ireland, and can only grow and function properly in an atmosphere of
national freedom. And the security of the people of Ireland has the same
roots as the security of the Irish working class. In the closely linked
modern world no nation can be free which can nationally connive at the
enslavement <pb n="124"/> of any section of that nation. Had the
misguided people of Ireland not stood so callously by when the forces of
economic conscription were endeavouring to destroy the Irish Transport
and General Workers' Union in 1913, the Irish trade unionists would now
be in a better position to fight the economic conscription against
Irish nationalists in 1915.</p>
<p>The sympathetic strike with its
slogan, <q>an injury to one is the concern of all</q>, was then the
universal object of hatred. It is now recognised that only the
sympathetic strike could be powerful enough to save the victims of
economic conscription from being forced into the army.</p>
<p>Out of
that experience is growing that feeling of identity of interests between
the forces of real nationalism and labour which we have long worked and
hoped for in Ireland. Labour recognises daily more clearly that its real
well-being is linked and bound up with the hope of growth of Irish
resources within Ireland, and nationalists realise that the real
progress of a nation towards freedom must be measured by the progress of
its most subject class.</p>
<p>We want and must have economic
conscription in Ireland for Ireland. Not the conscription of men by
hunger to compel them to fight for the power that denies them the right
to govern their own country, but the conscription by an Irish nation of
all the resources of the nation&mdash;its land, its railways, its
canals, its workshops, its docks, its mines, its mountains, its rivers
and streams, its factories and machinery, its horses, its cattle, <emph>and</emph> its men and women, all co-operating together
under one common direction that Ireland may live and bear upon her
fruitful bosom the greatest number of the freest people she has ever
known.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-12-18">December 18, 1915</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
<pb n="125"/>
<div2 n="2" type="section">
<p>Conscription means the enforced utilising of all the
manhood of a country in order to fight its battles. Economic
conscription would mean the enforced use of all the economic powers of a
country in order to fight its battles. If it is right to take the
manhood it is doubly right to take the necessary property in order to
strengthen the manhood in its warfare. An army, according to Napoleon,
travels on its stomach, and that being so, all the things that are
necessary for the stomach ought to be taken by a national government for
the purpose of strengthening its army. Free access to the railways are
vital to the very existence of a modern army. For that reason the
railways ought to be taken possession of by the Government on the same
principle and by the same business method as it takes possession of a
conscript. The Government does not pay the mother of a conscript for the
long and weary years she has spent in rearing the son of which it takes
possession. No, it simply pays him a few pence a day, feeds him, clothes
him, and sends him out to be shot. If he is shot she gets nothing for
the loss of her son, as she gets nothing for all the love and care and
anxiety she spent in giving him life and rearing him to manhood.</p>
<p>The same principle, the same business method, ought to apply to the
railways. All the railways ought at once to be confiscated and made
public property, no compensation being given to the shareholders any
more than is to be given to the fathers and mothers of conscripts.</p>
<p>All ships come under the same general law. The Empire cannot live as
an Empire without ships; the troops cannot be transported, provisioned
and kept supplied with the materials of war without ships, therefore as
sons are to be taken from their mothers all necessary vessels ought at
once be taken from their owners, without compensation and without
apology.</p>
<pb n="126"/>
<p>No matter how much the ships cost. They did
not cost their owners as much as the bearing of sons cost the mothers.
Take the ships.</p>
<p>Factories also for the production of clothes for
the army. The Government should take them; of course you cannot expect
soldiers to fight unless they are properly clothed, and you cannot
clothe them unless you have the factories to make the clothing. So
factories are as important as soldiers. Government is going to take the
soldiers from their homes, therefore let it take the factories from
the manufacturers. Let it be conscription all round.</p>
<p>There is a
grave danger of a famine in this country as the food is limited in
quantity owing to the export of so much food to feed the armies abroad.
At the same time there is an enormous quantity of splendid land lying
idle in demesnes and private estates of the nobility and gentry. This
land produces no crops, feeds nobody, and serves no useful purpose
whatever. By the same law of necessity upon which the Government stands
when it proposes conscription of men it ought also to immediately
confiscate all this idle land, and put labourers upon it to grow crops
to feed the multitude now in danger of starvation during the coming
year.</p>
<p>Will the Government do these things? Will it take the land,
will it take the factories, will it take the ships, will it take the
railways&mdash;as it proposes to take the manhood? It will not. Should
it need those things as it does and will, it will hire them at an
exorbitant rate of interest, paying their owners as much for the use of
them that those owners will pray for the war to continue for ever and
ever, amen.</p>
<p>But the human bodies, earthly tenements of human
souls, it will take as ruthlessly and hold as cheaply as possible. For
that is the way of governments. Flesh and blood are ever the cheapest
things in their eyes.</p>
<p>While we are establishing the Irish
Republic we shall need <pb n="127"/> to reverse that process of valuing
things. We must imitate those who have so long been our masters, but
with a difference.</p>
<p>We must also conscript. We shall not need to
conscript our soldiers&mdash;enough have already volunteered to carry on
the job, and tens of thousands more but await the word. But we shall
need to conscript the material; and as the propertied classes have so
shamelessly sold themselves to the enemy, the economic conscription of
their property will cause few qualms to whomsoever shall administer the
Irish Government in the first days of freedom.</p>
<p>All the material
of distribution&mdash;the railways, the canals, and all their equipment
will at once become the national property of the Irish state. All the
land stolen from the Irish people in the past, and not since restored in
some manner to the actual tillers of the soil, ought at once to be con-
fiscated and made the property of the Irish state. Taken in hand
energetically and cultivated under scientific methods such land would go
far to make this country independent of the ocean-borne commerce of
Great Britain. All factories and workshops owned by people who do not
yield allegiance to the Irish Government immediately upon its
proclamation should at once be confiscated, and their productive powers
applied to the service of the community loyal to Ireland, and to the
army in its service.</p>
<p>The conscription of the natural powers of
the land and the conscription of the mechanical forces having been
accomplished, the question of the conscription of the men to defend
their new-won property and national rights may follow should it be
necessary. But as the Irish state will then be in a position to
guarantee economic security and individual freedom to its citizens there
will be no lack of recruits to take up arms to safeguard that national
independence which they will see to be necessary for the perpetuation
of both.</p>
<p>England calls upon its citizens to surrender their
manhood to fight for an Empire that cares nothing for their rights as<pb n="128"/>
 toilers. Ireland should commence by guaranteeing the rights
of its workers to life and liberty, and having guaranteed those rights
should then call upon her manhood to protect them with arms in their
hands.</p>
<p>Whosoever in future speaks for Ireland, calls Irishmen to
arms, should remember that the first duty of Irishmen is to reconquer
their country&mdash;to take it back from those whose sole right to its
ownership is based upon conquest.</p>
<p>If the arms of the Irish
Volunteers and Irish Citizen Army is the military weapon of, the
economic conscription of its land and wealth is the material basis for,
that reconquest.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-01-15">January 15, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
</div1>
<pb n="129"/>
<div1 n="28" type="article">
<head>Two fateful Christmas Weeks</head>
<p>On the <date value="1796-12-21">21st December,
1796</date>, a French Fleet entered Bantry Bay bearing on board arms,
ammunition, and an army of fifteen thousand men for the liberation of
Ireland. The French army commander had been separated from the fleet in
a storm, and his successor hesitated about taking the responsibility of
landing his troops. For days the fleet rocked in perfect security in the
bay, until another storm arising caused the French commander to raise
his anchors and put again to sea, headed for France&mdash;and the
Empire's danger was over.</p>
<p>Consider it, friends! One hundred and
nineteen years ago the freedom of Ireland lay in the power of one man to
grasp, had he but had the decision of character necessary to cause him
to act. Two years afterwards it took over thirty thousand English
soldiers to conquer the one county of Wexford, and that county was one
of those which had been most foolish in surrendering its arms at the
demand of a government proclamation. Had Wexford risen, had any part of
Ireland risen in December, 1796, even General Grouchy could not have
refused to land, and with the diversion his force would have caused the
success of the insurrection must have been certain. But the French
commander would not risk his troops amongst and for a people who were
apparently risking nothing for themselves. The leaders of the United
Irishmen hesitated&mdash;their arrangements were not complete. The
French commander hesitated, everybody hesitated, except the English
Government.</p>
<p>One hundred and nineteen years ago. And again Ireland
looks across the sea, and perhaps those across the sea look over to
Ireland, and wonder.</p>
<pb n="130"/>
<p>The doubters
asked Christ in His day for a sign. In our day they still ask for a
sign. And in both cases it is the same answer <text>
<body>
<p>The Kingdom of Heaven [Freedom] is within you. The Kingdom of Heaven can
only be taken by violence.</p>
</body>
</text></p>
<p>Heavenly words with an earthly meaning. Christmas week, 1796; Christmas week, 1915&mdash;<emph>still hesitating</emph>.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1915-12-25">December 25, 1915</date>.</bibl>
<note type="end" resp="auth"><q>The mere fact that it
is not yet possible to speak or write of '98 without arousing a host of
stormy passions, hopes, and fears, proves indubitably that the cause
which produced such a host of apostles and martyrs in that fateful year
is NOT yet a lost cause; and is not regarded as such, either by friends
or enemies.</q> <bibl><emph>Introduction,</emph> <title>'98
Readings</title>, <date>1897</date>.</bibl></note>
<note type="end" resp="DR">Tone in his <title>Autobiography</title> defends Grouchy, and
blames Rear Admiral Bouvet for the failure. See Lecky, <title>History of Ireland</title>, Vol. III, p. 539.
The detail, of course, does not affect Connolly's argument. He also
refers to Grouchy, <title>Labour in Irish History</title>, p. 68.</note>
</div1>
<pb n="131"/>
<div1 n="29" type="article">
<head>The Volunteers of '82</head>
<p>A correspondent has written to us
asking whether there is not a great similarity between the position and
actions of the Irish Volunteers of our day, and that of the Volunteers
of '82. He points out that the Volunteers of '82, despite the eulogies
lavished upon them by the writers of Irish history, were a ghastly and
inglorious failure, and that they were so because they lacked the
revolutionary quality. They had England at their mercy, and feared to
strike, but when England had them at her mercy she struck without
hesitation and without scruple.</p>
<p>The comparison is good, but not
perfect. Indeed, no comparison is ever perfect. All comparisons and
analogies from history fail in some degree, or at some point. If the
circumstances are the same the characters of the actors are different;
if the characters of the actors are the same the circumstances are
different. Usually there is alike a blending and a dissimilarity on both
essentials.</p>
<p>A great socialist writer, Karl Marx, has said that
history repeats itself&mdash;once as tragedy, and once as farce. We
suppose that the real explanation of the supposed tendency of history to
repeat itself lies in the tendency of human beings to imitate whatever
action has impressed itself much upon the imagination, just as in a
company of individuals we generally find some persons almost
unconsciously imitating the mannerisms of any obtrusive personality in
the group.<note n="1" type="end" resp="auth"><pb n="135"/> <q>But the cult of
tradition may be, and in Ireland undoubtedly is, cultivated to an extent
which often makes it not only ridiculous but positively harmful&hellip;. Thus the enthusiastic nationalist revering the
memory of Wolfe Tone strives sedulously to imitate him, forgetting alike
that Tone's greatness lay in the fact that he imitated nobody, and that
the line of action required at a time when the democracy were
unenfranchised, can hardly be accepted as a rule of conduct when the
suffrage is widespread, and public bodies generally under public
control&hellip;while changed conditions do necessitate
changed methods of realising an ideal, they do not necessarily involve
the abandonment of that ideal, if in itself good. The
revolutionary nationalist worships the ideals and adheres to the methods of the past; Home Rulers profess to worship at the same shrine, but
adopt neither the ideals or methods of past revolutionists; and the
Socialist Republicans adhere to the high ideal of national freedom
sought for in the past, go beyond it to a fuller ideal which we conceive
to flow from national freedom as a natural necessary consequence, but
reject as utterly unsuited to present conditions the methods of bygone
generations. We <emph>agitate</emph> for the
Revolution; let those who will <emph>conspire</emph> for it;
when the hour for action arrives our only rivalry need be as to which
shall strike the most effective blows against the common enemy.</q>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1900-06-23">June 23,
1900</date>.</bibl></note></p>
<p>Take any great historical crisis, and you
will find that whenever a similar crisis arises thereafter there will
develop amongst the minor actors in the latter a tendency to pattern
themselves after the outstanding figures in the first. And a still
greater tendency amongst the unthinking multitude to insist upon all <pb n="132"/> the actors in the second crisis being invested with all the
merits and demerits of their forerunners.</p>
<p>In the case we are
considering it is indubitable that the Irish Volunteers of our day
deliberately patterned themselves after the Volunteers of Grattan's
time, adopted their name, and many of their traditions. It is also true
that the great international crisis that has since developed has given
to the experience of our own Volunteers a great similarity to the
experience of the Volunteers of '82.</p>
<p>The Volunteers of Grattan's
time were betrayed by their leaders, as the Volunteers of our time were
betrayed by the Parliamentary Party. The Volunteers of Grattan's time
broke up without having consolidated their legislative victory, owing
to their leaders' faith in the promises of English statesmen just as the
Volunteers of our time were disorganised by the fact of their <corr resp="DMD" sic="leaders">leaders'</corr> trust in the promises of
English statesmen.</p>
<p>Despite their enthusiasm for Ireland the
greatest section of Grattan's Volunteers became active members of the
yeomanry who afterwards achieved notoriety for their crimes against
Ireland, just as a considerable section of the Volunteers of our day
have become soldiers of the English army&mdash;active agents of the
military army of the oppressors of their country.</p>
<p>A poem written
at the time of Grattan's Volunteers and the United Irishmen somewhat
scathingly refers to them in the following manner:<note n="2" type="end" resp="DR">See <title>Literary Remains of the United Irishmen of
1798</title>, edited by R. R. Madden, (1887), p. 246. The verses were
actually written by Dr. Madden himself over his pseudonym <q>Ierne</q>.</note></p>
<p><text>
<body>
<lg n="1" type="quatrain">
<l>What did the Volunteers?</l>
<l>They mustered
and paraded,</l>
<l>Until their laurels faded,</l>
<l>This did the
Volunteers!</l>
</lg>
<lg type="quatrain">
<l><gap reason="ellipsis"/></l>
</lg>
<lg n="2" type="quatrain">
<l>How died the
Volunteers?</l>
<l>The death that's fit for slaves,</l>
<l>They slunk
into their graves,</l>
<l>Thus died the Volunteers!</l>
</lg>
</body>
</text> <pb n="133"/></p>
<p>And our correspondent seems to infer
that in this respect history is again about to repeat itself. We
respectfully differ with him. We can see no real analogy between the
Volunteers of Grattan's time, and the Irish Volunteers since the split.
Up till that period the analogy was perfect. Up till that time the stage
was set for just such another betrayal, for at least just such another
fiasco. But we cannot see that the present leaders of the Irish
Volunteers can at all be compared to the crowd of aristocratic, clerical
and capitalist reactionaries who steered the Volunteers of '82 to their
destruction.</p>
<p>Nor, and this is even more important, is it at all
conceivable that the rank and file of the Irish Volunteer movement could
be betrayed as were their forerunners. These Volunteers of '82 were in
reality English colonists with a distinctly anti-Irish upbringing and
mental outlook. Their enthusiasm for Ireland was the enthusiasm of
settlers for their new home, against the government in the home they had
left. If they were hostile to English influence they were still more
hostile to the vast mass of the natives of Ireland. They considered
themselves as British subjects in the first place, and only as Irishmen
in the second place. Their appeal was to the traditions of the British
Empire, and to the memory of the <q>glorious
Revolution</q> of 1688&mdash;the Revolution that set King William III
upon his Irish throne. Irish traditions, Irish heroes, Irish martyrs for
freedom, all, all were alien to them, and therefore their betrayal by
their leaders was not in their eyes a national betrayal, but only an
aristocratic defection in a struggle of two parties within the British
Empire. If you grasp that fact clearly enough you will understand why,
despite our own criticism of what we deem their lack of vision, we yet
refuse to accept our correspondent's comparison as we regard it as
unjust to the leaders of to-day.</p>
<p>The present-day leaders of the
Irish Volunteers do undoubtedly hold allegiance to Ireland as their
first and most sacred duty. They are not merely dissatisfied subjects of
the British Empire, <pb n="134"/> they are dissatisfied to be subjects of
the Empire at all. Among them there may be some who hold that to have a
Volunteer force at all is enough of a gain for one generation; there may
be others who like to play at soldiers but shrink from the reality, and
there may be others who were never more than wire-pullers, and who have
brought their wire-pulling propensities into their new conditions. No
organisation can hope to be quite free of such undesirables, nor even
sure of being able to recognise them.</p>
<p>But the one certain mark to
distinguish the Irish Volunteers of to-day from their forerunners is the
fact that in their allegiance they set Ireland first. Given that, and
all other things can be forgiven them. True, the presence upon their
Executive of some of the men who voted the betrayal to John Redmond and
his party is a standing invitation to suspicion and distrust. These men
were either false to their trust, or incapable blockheads. In either
case they should have been sent back to the obscurity and harmlessness
of private life to live under suspicion or pity the remainder of their
days. To place them again in power was to forfeit the complete <corr resp="DMD" sic="confidnce">confidence</corr> of the people in a time
where complete confidence was necessary. Yet we have heard demands for
absolute trust and confidence in a body some of whose trusted members
have already abused that trust so vilely.</p>
<p>But granting all this
the point remains that the Irish Volunteers of our time have that great
quality the want of which betrayed their predecessors. That quality is:
complete faith in their own country, complete confidence in her destiny
to be a nation, and complete reliance upon the power of Ireland to
survive all the shocks an adverse fate may bring upon her.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-01-08">January 8, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="136"/>
<div1 n="30" type="article">
<head>What is our Programme?</head>
<p>We are often asked the above
question. Sometimes the question is not too politely put, sometimes it
is put in frantic bewilderment, sometimes it is put in wrathful
objurgation, sometimes it is put in tearful entreaty, sometimes it is
put by Nationalists who affect to despise the Labour movement, sometimes
it is put by Socialists who distrust the Nationalists because of the
anti-Labour record of many of their friends, sometimes it is put by our
enemies, sometimes by our friends, and always it is pertinent, and
worthy of an answer.</p>
<p>The Labour movement is like no other
movement. Its strength lies in being like no other movement. It is never
so strong as when it stands alone. Other movements dread analysis and
shun all attempts to define their objects. The Labour movement delights
in analysing, and is perpetually defining and re-defining its
principles and objects. The man or woman who has caught the spirit of
the Labour movement brings that spirit of analysis and definition into
all his or her public acts, and expects at all times to answer the call
to define his or her position. They cannot live on illusions, nor thrive
by them; even should their heads be in the clouds they will make no
forward step until they are assured that their feet rest upon the solid
earth.</p>
<p>In this they are essentially different from the middle or
professional classes, and the parties or movements controlled by such
classes in Ireland. These always talk of realities, but nourish
themselves and their followers upon the unsubstantial meat of phrases;
always prate about being intensely practical but nevertheless spend
their whole lives in following visions.</p>
<p>When the average
non-Labour patriot in Ireland who boasts of his practicality is
brought in contact with the cold world <pb n="137"/> and its problems he
shrinks from the contact. Should his feet touch the solid earth he
affects to despise it as a <q>mere material basis</q>,
and strives to make the people believe that true patriotism needs no
foundation to rest upon other than the brain storms of its poets,
orators, journalists, and leaders.</p>
<p>Ask such people for a
programme and you are branded as a carping critic; refuse to accept
their judgment as the last word in human wisdom and you become an enemy
to be carefully watched; insist that in the crisis of your country's
history your first allegiance is to your country and not to any leader,
executive, or committee, and you are forthwith a disturber, a fac-
tionist, a wrecker.</p>
<p>What is our programme? We at lease, in
conformity with the spirit of our movement, will try and tell it. Our
programme in time of peace was to gather into Irish hands in Irish trade
unions the control of all the forces of production and distribution in
Ireland. We never believed that freedom would be realised without
fighting for it. From our earliest declaration of policy in Dublin in
1896 the editor of this paper has held to the dictum that our ends
should be secured <q>peacefully if possible, forcibly if necessary</q>.
Believing so, we saw what the world outside Ireland is realising to-day,
that the destinies of the world and the fighting strength of armies are
at the mercy of organised Labour as soon as that Labour becomes truly
revolutionary. Thus we strove to make Labour in Ireland
organised&mdash;and revolutionary.</p>
<p>We saw that should it come
to a test in Ireland, (as we hoped and prayed it might come), between
those who stood for the Irish nation and those who stood for the foreign
rule, the greatest civil asset in the hand of the Irish nation for use
in the struggle would be the control of Irish docks, shipping, rail-
ways and production by Unions that gave sole allegiance to Ireland.</p>
<p>We realised that the power of the enemy to hurl his forces upon the
forces of Ireland would lie at the mercy of the men <pb n="138"/> who
controlled the transport system of Ireland; we saw that the hopes of
Ireland as a nation rested upon the due recognition of the identity of
interest between that ideal and the rising hopes of Labour.</p>
<p>In
Europe to-day we have seen the strongest governments of the world exert-
ing every effort, holding out all possible sort of inducement, to
organised Labour to use its organisation on the side of those
governments in time of war. We have spent the best part of our lifetime
striving to create in Ireland the working class spirit that would create
an Irish organisation of Labour willing to do voluntarily for Ireland
what those governments of Europe are beseeching their trade unions to do
for their countries. And we have partly succeeded.</p>
<p>We have
succeeded in creating an organisation that will willingly do more for
Ireland than any trade union in the world has attempted to do for its
national government. Had we not been attacked and betrayed by many of
our fervent advanced patriots, had they not been so anxious to destroy
us, so willing to applaud even the British Government when it attacked
us, had they stood by us and pushed our organisation all over Ireland it
would now be in our power at a word to crumple up and demoralise every
offensive move of the enemy against the champions of Irish freedom. Had
we been able to carry out all our plans, as such an Irish organisation
of Labour alone could carry them out, we could at a word have created
all the conditions necessary to the striking of a successful blow
whenever the military arm of Ireland wished to move.</p>
<p>Have we a
programme? We are the only people that had a programme&mdash;that
understood the mechanical conditions of modern war, and the dependence
of national power upon industrial control. What is our programme now? At
the grave risk of displeasing alike the perfervid Irish patriot and the
British <q>competent military authority</q>, we shall
tell it.</p>
<p>We believe that in times of peace we should work along
the <pb n="139"/> lines of peace to strengthen the nation, and we believe
that whatever strengthens and elevates the working class strengthens
the nation. But we also believe that in times of war we should act as in
war. We despise, entirely despise and loathe, all the mouthings and
mouthers about war who infest Ireland in time of peace, just as we
despise and loathe all the cantings about caution and restraint to which
the same people treat us in times of war.</p>
<p>Mark well then our
programme. While the war lasts and Ireland still is a subject nation we
shall continue to urge her to fight for her freedom.</p>
<p>We shall
continue, in season or out of season, to teach that the <q>far-flung battle line</q> of England is weakest at the
point nearest its heart, that Ireland is in that position of tactical
advantage, that a defeat of England in India, Egypt, the Balkans or
Flanders would not be so dangerous to the British Empire as any conflict
of armed forces in Ireland, that the time for Ireland's battle is NOW,
the place for Ireland's battle is HERE. That a strong man may deal lusty
blows with his fists against a host of surrounding foes, and conquer,
but will succumb if a child sticks a pin in his heart.</p>
<p>But the
moment peace is once admitted by the British Government as being a
subject ripe for discussion, <emph>that moment our policy
will be for peace</emph> and in direct opposition to all talk or
preparation for armed revolution. We will be no party to leading out
Irish patriots to meet the might of an England at peace. The moment
peace is in the air we shall strictly confine ourselves, and lend all
our influence to the work of turning the thought of Labour in Ireland to
the work of peaceful reconstruction.</p>
<p>That is our programme. You
can now compare it with the programme of those who bid you hold your
hand now, and thus put it in the power of the enemy to patch up a
temporary peace, turn round and smash you at his leisure, and then go to<pb n="140"/>
 war again with the Irish question settled&mdash;in the
graves of Irish patriots.</p>
<p>We fear that is what is going to
happen. It is to our mind inconceivable that the British public should
allow conscription to be applied to England and not to Ireland. Nor do
the British Government desire it. But that Government will use the cry
of the necessities of war to force conscription upon the people of
England, and will then make a temporary peace, and turn round to force
Ireland to accept the same terms as have been forced upon England.</p>
<p>The English public will gladly see this done&mdash;misfortune likes
company. The situation will then shape itself thus: the Irish
Volunteers who are pledged to fight conscription will either need to
swallow their pledge, and see the young men of Ireland conscripted, or
will need to resist conscription, and engage the military force of
England at a time when England is at peace.</p>
<p>This is what the
diplomacy of England is working for, what the stupidity of some of our
leaders who imagine they are Wolfe Tones is making possible. It is our
duty, it is the duty of all who wish to save Ireland from such shame or
such slaughter to strengthen the hand of those of the leaders who are
for action as against those who are playing into the hands of the
enemy.</p>
<p>We are neither rash nor cowardly. We know our opportunity
when we see it, and we know when it has gone. We know that at the end of
this war England will have at least an army of one million men, <emph>or more than two soldiers for every adult male in
Ireland</emph>. And these soldiers veterans of the greatest war in
history.</p>
<p>We shall not want to fight those men. We shall devote
our attention to organising their comrades who return to civil life, to
organising them into trade unions and Labour parties to secure them
their rights in civil life.</p>
<p>Unless we emigrate to some country
where there are men.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-01-22">January 22, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="141"/>
<div1 n="31" type="article">
<head>What is a free Nation?</head>
<p>We are moved to ask this question because of the
extraordinary confusion of thought upon the subject which prevails in
this country, due principally to the pernicious and misleading newspaper
garbage upon which the Irish public has been fed for the past
twenty-five years.</p>
<p>Our Irish daily newspapers have done all that
human agencies could do to confuse the public mind upon the question of
what the essentials of a free nation are, what a free nation must be,
and what a nation cannot submit to lose without losing its title to be
free.</p>
<p>It is because of this extraordinary newspaper-created
ignorance that we find so many people enlisting in the British army
under the belief that Ireland has at long last attained to the status of
a free nation, and that therefore the relations between Ireland and
England have at last been placed upon the satisfactory basis of freedom.
Ireland and England, they have been told, are now sister nations, joined
in the bond of Empire, but each enjoying equal liberties&mdash;the equal
liberties of nations equally free. How many recruits this idea sent into
the British Army in the first flush of the war it would be difficult to
estimate, but they were assuredly numbered by the thousand.</p>
<p>The
Irish Parliamentary Party, which at every stage of the Home Rule game
had been outwitted and bull-dozed by Carson and the Unionists, which had
surrendered every point and yielded every advantage to the skilful
campaign of the aristocratic orange military clique in times of peace,
behaved in equally as cowardly and treacherous a manner in the crisis of
war.</p>
<p>There are few men in whom the blast of the bugles of war do
not arouse the fighting instinct, do not excite to some chivalrous <pb n="142"/> impulses if only for a moment. But the Irish Parliamentary
Party must be reckoned amongst that few. In them the bugles of war
only awakened the impulse to sell the bodies of their countrymen as
cannon fodder in exchange for the gracious smiles of the rulers of
England. In them the call of war sounded only as a call to emulate in
prostitution. They heard the call of war&mdash;and set out to prove that
the nationalists of Ireland were more slavish than the orangemen of
Ireland, would more readily kill and be killed at the bidding of an
Empire that despised them both.</p>
<p>The orangemen had at least the
satisfaction that they were called upon to fight abroad in order to save
an Empire they, had been prepared to fight to retain unaltered at home;
but the nationalists were called upon to fight abroad to save an Empire
whose rulers in their most generous moments had refused to grant their
country the essentials of freedom in nationhood.</p>
<p>Fighting abroad
the orangeman knows that he fights to preserve the power of the
aristocratic rulers whom he followed at home; fighting abroad the
nationalist soldier is fighting to maintain unimpaired the power of
those who conspired to shoot him down at home when he asked for a
small instalment of freedom.</p>
<p>The orangeman says: <q>We will
fight for the Empire abroad if its rulers will promise not to force us
to submit to Home Rule</q>. And the rulers say heartily: <q>It is
unthinkable that we should coerce Ulster for any such purpose</q>.</p>
<p>The Irish Parliamentary Party and its press said: <q>We will prove
ourselves fit to be in the British Empire by fighting for it, in the
hopes that after the war is over we will get Home Rule</q>. And the
rulers of the British Empire say: <q>Well you know what we have promised
Carson, but send out the Irish rabble to fight for us, and we will,
ahem, consider your application after the war</q>. Whereat, all the
Parliamentary <pb n="143"/> leaders and their press call the world to
witness that they have won a wonderful victory!</p>
<p>James Fintan
Lalor spoke and conceived of Ireland as <q>a discrowned queen, taking
back her own with an armed hand</q>. Our Parliamentarians treat Ireland,
their country, as an old prostitute selling her soul for the promise of
favours <emph>to come</emph>, and in the spirit of that
conception of their country they are conducting their political
campaign.</p>
<p>That they should be able to do so with even the partial
success that for a while attended their apostasy was possible only
because so few in Ireland really understood the answer to the question
that stands at the head of this article.</p>
<p>What is a free Nation? A
free nation is one which possesses absolute control over all its own
internal resources and powers, and which has no restriction upon its
intercourse with all other nations similarly circumstanced except the
restrictions placed upon it by nature. Is that the case of Ireland? If
the Home Rule Bill were in operation would that be the case of Ireland?
To both questions the answer is: no, most emphatically, NO!</p>
<p>A
free nation must have complete control over its own harbours, to open
them or close them at will, to shut out any commodity, or allow it to
enter in, just as it seemed best to suit the well-being of its own
people, and in obedience to their wishes, and entirely free of the
interference of any other nation, and in complete disregard of the
wishes of any other nation. Short of that power no nation possesses the
first essentials of freedom.</p>
<p>Does Ireland possess such control?
No. Will the Home Rule Bill give such control over Irish harbours to
Ireland? It will not. Ireland must open its harbours when it suits the
interests of another nation, England, and must shut its harbours when it
suits the interests of another nation, England; and the Home Rule Bill
pledges Ireland to accept this loss of national control for ever.</p>
<pb n="144"/>
<p>How would you like to live in a house if the keys of all
the doors of that house were in the pockets of a rival of yours who had
often robbed you in the past? Would you be satisfied if he told you that
he and you were going to be friends for ever more, but insisted upon you
signing an agreement to leave him control of all your doors, and custody
of all your keys? That is the condition of Ireland to-day, and will be
the condition of Ireland under Redmond and Devlin's precious Home Rule
Bill.</p>
<p>That is worth dying for in Flanders, the Balkans, Egypt or
India, is it not?</p>
<p>A free nation must have full power to nurse
industries to health, either by government encouragement or by
government prohibition of the sale of goods of foreign rivals. It may be
foolish to do either, but a nation is not free unless it has that power,
as all free nations in the world have to-day. Ireland has no such power,
will have no such power under Home Rule. The nourishing of industries in
Ireland hurts capitalists in England, therefore this power is expressly
withheld from Ireland.</p>
<p>A free nation must have full power to
alter, amend, or abolish or modify the laws under which the property of
its citizens is held in obedience to the demand of its own citizens for
any such alteration, amendment, abolition, or modification. Every free
nation has that power; Ireland does not have it, and is not allowed it
by the Home Rule Bill.</p>
<p>It is recognised to-day that it is upon
the wise treatment of economic power and resources, and upon the wise
ordering <corr resp="DMD" sic="o">of</corr> social activities that the
future of nations depends. That nation will be the richest and happiest
which has the foresight to marshal the most carefully its natural
resources to national ends. But Ireland is denied this power, and will
be denied it under Home Rule. Ireland's rich natural resources, and the
kindly genius of its children, are not to be allowed to combine for the
satisfaction <pb n="145"/> of Irish wants, save in so far as their
combination can operate on lines approved of by the rulers of
England.</p>
<p>Her postal service, her telegraphs, her wireless, her
customs and excise, her coinage, her fighting forces, her relations with
other nations, her merchant commerce, her property relations, her
national activities, her legislative sovereignty&mdash;all the things
that are essential to a nation's freedom are denied to Ireland now, and
are denied to her under the provisions of the Home Rule Bill. And Irish
soldiers in the English Army are fighting in Flanders to win for
Belgium, we are told, all those things which the British Empire, now as
in the past, denies to Ireland.</p>
<p>There is not a Belgian patriot
who would not prefer to see his country devastated by war a hundred
times rather than accept as a settlement for Belgium what Redmond and
Devlin have accepted for Ireland. Have we Irish been fashioned in meaner
clay than the Belgians?</p>
<p>There is not a pacifist in England who
would wish to end the war without Belgium being restored to full
possession of all those national rights and powers which Ireland does
not possess, and which the Home Rule Bill denies to her. But these same
pacifists never mention Ireland when discussing or suggesting terms of
settlement. Why should they? Belgium is fighting for her independence,
but Irishmen are fighting for the Empire that denies Ireland every right
that Belgians think worth fighting for.</p>
<p>And yet Belgium as a
nation is, so to speak, but a creation of yesterday&mdash;an
artificial product of the schemes of statesmen. Whereas, the frontiers
of Ireland, the ineffaceable marks of the separate existence of Ireland,
are as old as Europe itself, the handiwork of the Almighty, not of
politicians. And as the marks of Ireland's separate nationality were not
made by politicians so they cannot be unmade by them.</p>
<p>As the
separate individual is to the family, so the separate <pb n="146"/>
nation is to humanity. The perfect family is that which best draws out
the inner powers of the individual, the most perfect world is that in
which the separate existence of nations is held most sacred. There can
be no perfect Europe in which Ireland is denied even the least of its
national rights; there can be no worthy Ireland whose children brook
tamely such denial. If such denial has been accepted by soulless slaves
of politicians then it must be repudiated by Irish men and women whose
souls are still their own.</p>
<p>The peaceful progress of the future
requires the possession by Ireland of all the national rights now denied
to her. Only in such possession can the workers of Ireland see stability
and security for the fruits of their toil and organisation. A destiny
not of our fashioning has chosen this generation as the one called upon
for the supreme act of self-sacrifice&mdash;to die if need be that our
race might live in freedom.</p>
<p>Are we worthy of the choice? Only by
our response to the call can that question be answered.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-02-12">February 12, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="147"/>
<div1 n="32" type="article">
<head>The Slums and the Trenches</head>
<p>A speaker at a recent
recruiting meeting in Dublin declared that the Dublin slums were more
unhealthy than the trenches in Flanders, and the same <q>bright saying</q> has been repeated in a circular issued
by the recruiting authorities.</p>
<p>It is the English idea of wit.</p>
<p>Consider it, my friends, consider it well. The trenches in Flanders have
been the graves of scores of thousands of young Irishmen, scores of
thousands of the physically strongest of the Irish race have met their
death there in desperate battle with a brave enemy who bore them no
malice and only wished well for their country.</p>
<p>A very large
proportion of these young Irishmen were born and reared in the slums and
tenement houses of Dublin. These same slums are notorious the world over
for their disease-breeding unhealthy character. All the world over it is
known that the poor of Dublin are housed under conditions worse than
those of any civilised people on God's earth.</p>
<p>From out of those
slums these poor misguided brothers of ours have been tricked and
deluded into giving battle for England&mdash;into waging war upon the
German nation which does not permit anywhere within its boundaries such
slums and fever dens as the majority of Dublin's poor must live in.</p>
<p>When at last the common-sense of the people of Dublin reasserts
itself, and men and women begin to protest against this suicidal
destruction of the Irish race in a war that is not of their making, and
for an Empire that they abhor, the cheap wits of the recruiters
sneeringly tell them that there is more danger of death in a Dublin slum
than in a trench in the line of battle.</p>
<p>But you can die
honourably in a Dublin slum. If you die of fever, or even of want,
because you preferred to face fever <pb n="148"/> and want, rather than
sell your soul to the enemies of your class and country, such death is
an honourable death, a thousand times more honourable than if you won a
V.C. committing murder at the bidding of your country's enemies.</p>
<p>These are war times. In times of war the value of the individual life
is but little, but the estimate set upon honour is even higher than in
times of peace. True, the conception of honour is often all wrong, but
the community and the individual in time of war do esteem highly the
individual who sets his own conception of honour higher than his regard
for his own life.</p>
<p>The boy or man who has a soul strong enough to
resist all blandishments to betray the cause of freedom as he sees it,
who is strong enough in his own mind and purpose to face the prospect of
long unemployment and its consequent misery and want, who can see day by
day his strength wasting and his body shrinking for want of nourishment,
who knows that that nourishment will be his for a time if he is prepared
to sell himself into the service of the age-long enemy, and who in face
of all this is yet man enough to hold out to the last, should he die in
his Dublin slum is nevertheless a hero and a martyr fit to be ranked
with and honoured alongside of the greatest heroes and noblest martyrs
this island has produced.</p>
<p><q>The trenches healthier than the
slums of Dublin</q>. Ay, my masters, but death in a slum may be the
noblest of all deaths if it is the death of a man who preferred to die
rather than dirty his soul by accepting the gold of England, and death
in the trenches fighting for the Empire is that kind of death spoken of
by the poet who lashes with his scorn the recreant who <text>
<body>
<lg type="fragment">
<l>doubly dying shall go down</l>
<l>To the vile dust
from which he sprung,</l>
<l>Unwept, unhonoured, and unsung.</l>
</lg>
</body>
</text></p>
<p>In the times of the wars at the end of the
eighteenth century when all that was best in Ireland eagerly,
passionately awaited <pb n="149"/> the coming of the French, the armies
of England were at least two-thirds composed of Irishmen. Are these
poor deluded fools remembered or honoured to-day? Where in all Ireland
could a popular demonstration be organised in their honour. Not in any
one part of Ireland would any body of Irish men or women spontaneously
turn out to do tribute to their memory. Nor yet could all the gold of
the British Empire induce any popular body or trade union in nation-
alist Ireland to walk in a procession to pay the tribute of respect to
their record.</p>
<p>But in the same period there were men and women in
Ireland who with all the wealth, power, and influence of the country
against them, took their stand on the side of England's enemies, and
held by that faith to the last, despite poverty, hunger and want,
despite imprisonment, torture and exile, despite death by the bullet,
the bayonet and the hangman. These men and women held to the creed that
England has no right in Ireland, never had any right in Ireland, never
can have any right in Ireland, and so holding they believed that whilst
England so holds Ireland&mdash;whilst England is here at all&mdash;every
enemy whose blows hurt England is a natural ally to Ireland, every blow
which weakens England, loosens a link of the chain that binds Ireland in
slavery.</p>
<p>These men and women, who were they? In what estimation
are they held in Ireland to-day? They are the heroes and the heroines of
the popular mind&mdash;the demigods of modern Irish history. Scarcely
more than a century is gone and already they are enshrined in the
memories of the Irish race, whilst all who fought for England are
forgotten, or repudiated when remembered.</p>
<p>Did you ever hear an
Irish man or woman say, <q>my grandfather fought for England in '98<corr resp="DMD" sic="?"></corr></q> and expect to get popular approval or
respect because of that fact? You did not. But if ever you met a man or
woman who could say that their grandfather or great grandfather, fought
against England in <pb n="150"/> '98, were you not proud to meet them,
and did not you and all your friends look upon them with respect because
of what their ancestor had done against England? You did. And you were
quite right, too.</p>
<p>But some people in Ireland do honour the men
who fought for England in '98, or pretend to honour them. Who are these
people? They are the people whose ancestors were the greatest enemies of
the Irish race, the evictors, the floggers, the pitchcappers, the
exterminators of the Irish people. The descendants of the landlords who
<q>enforced their rights with a rod of iron and renounced their duties
with a front of brass.</q> And some people there are who pretend to
honour the men who fight for England in our day. Who are they who in
press and on platform pour their praises on the heroism of our poor
brothers whom they have driven or coaxed to the front?</p>
<p>Who are
they? Why, they are the men who locked us out in 1913, the men who
solemnly swore that they would starve three-fourths of the workers of
Dublin in order to compel them to give up their civil rights&mdash;the
right to organise. The recruiters in Dublin and in Ireland generally are
the men who pledged themselves together in an unholy alliance to smash
trade unionism, by bringing hunger, destitution and misery in fiercest
guise into the homes of Dublin's poor.</p>
<p>On every recruiting
platform in Dublin you will see the faces of the men who in 1913-14 met
together day by day to tell of their plans to murder our women and
children by starvation, and are now appealing to the men of those women
and children to fight in order to save the precious skins of the gangs
that conspired to starve and outrage them.</p>
<p>Who are the recruiters
in Dublin? Who is it that sits on every recruiting committee, that
spouts for recruits from every recruiting platform?</p>
<pb n="151"/>
<p>Who are they? They are the men who set the police upon the unarmed
people in O'Connell Street, who filled the jails with our young working
class girls, who batoned and imprisoned hundreds of Dublin workers, who
racked and pillaged the poor rooms of the poorest of our class, who
plied policemen with drink, suborned and hired perjurers to give false
evidence, murdered John Byrne and James Nolan and Alice Brady, and in
the midst of a Dublin reeking with horror and reeling with suffering and
pain publicly gloated over our misery and exulted in their power to get
<q>three square meals per day</q> for their own overfed
stomachs.</p>
<p>These are the recruiters. Every Irish man or boy who
joins at their call gives these carrion a fresh victory over the Dublin
working class&mdash;over the working class of all Ireland.</p>
<p>The
trenches safer than the Dublin slums! We may yet see the day that the
trenches will be safer for these gentry than any part of Dublin.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-02-26">February 26, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="152"/>
<div1 n="33" type="article">
<head>The Days of March</head>
<p>March 4th is the date which by
common consent is set aside in Ireland for the commemoration of the
heroic attempt of Robert Emmet. March 6th is the anniversary of the
Fenian Rising of 1867. Does March 1916 carry in its womb anything of
national importance for Ireland? Will our children be commemorating an
attempt, celebrating a victory, or mourning over a lost opportunity?</p>
<p>At this date who can tell? Despite all the pretensions of the British
Government during the trial of Emmet, and despite all the alarmist and
suspicion-breeding reports of the moderates since, we now know beyond
all doubt that had Robert Emmet pushed on to the Castle on the day of
his rising he would have captured that edifice of evil omen, and roused
all Ireland by the blow. The Government were not in the least prepared
for the emergency, and were only saved by the reluctance of the young
patriot to go on in a fight the first moments of which had been stained,
as he conceived it, by the useless shedding of blood.</p>
<p>Dublin
Castle is not of so much importance to-day in the political or mili-
tary government of Ireland, but in the eighteenth and early nineteenth
centuries it was the real centre of all the activities of foreign rule
in this country, as it had been for centuries before. In the hands of
the insurgents Dublin Castle would have been the centre of a
revolutionary uprising such as would have shaken the British Empire to
its foundations. It did not fall into the hands of the insurgents, as we
have said, simply because the revolutionists were not as ready to shed
blood as were their rulers.</p>
<p>It is not probable that much blood
will ever again be shed for the sake of the capture of Dublin Castle,
but it is probable <pb n="153"/> that the evil example of the Irish and
English press in extolling and glorifying deeds of blood in the
present war may make future revolutionists less scrupulous as to means,
and more determined to be as ruthless as their rulers.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">Here Connolly expresses his own view on proposals to attack
Dublin Castle.</note></p>
<p>The Fenian Rising in March, 1867, was
almost foredoomed to failure because like the United Irishmen in '98,
and the Young Irelanders in 1848, the leaders had allowed the golden
opportunity to slip away, and their attempt when it came was belated.
The Government were on the alert, and the Irish regiments suspected of
Fenian sympathies had been rushed off to India, and other places where
their English masters could rely upon them.</p>
<p>Irishmen in the
British Army in India in those days, like Irishmen in Flanders or
Gallipoli in our own day, fought the enemies of England because they
wanted to get back home to Ireland, not because they loved England, or
cared about the Empire. If they did not kill the enemies of England the
enemies of England would probably have killed them. The Irish soldiers
do not fight for England; they fight for their return ticket to Ireland,
and England always keeps the return half in her pocket as long as she
requires their services.</p>
<p>Thus in the days of Fenianism the
English Government by shipping off the Irish soldiers out of Ireland did
a double stroke of work. She weakened her Irish enemies, and
strengthened herself against her Indian enemies. The leaders of the
Fenian movement had preached and practised caution, and counselled delay
until their plans were thoroughly matured, but the Government struck
before that time, and all the sacrifice and suffering bore no immediate
fruit.</p>
<p>Remember. It is easy for us now to be wise after the
event, and to tell with unerring accuracy just when the blow might have
been struck with the greatest probability of success. It is easy for us
now because we know certain things which it was impossible for the
Fenian leaders to know. If we know <pb n="154"/> where they made a
mistake it is not because our judgment is better than was theirs, but
rather because we are judging a crisis that is past and whose hap-
penings are all therefore familiar to us.</p>
<p>The hurler on the ditch
sees the most of the game because he <emph>is</emph> on the
ditch, and not intent upon keeping his own end up in the place allotted
to him on the field. So the student of history is wise, and can justly
criticise the mistakes of men whose powers of judgment may nevertheless
have been infinitely superior to his own. He may justly criticise their
mistakes, but may also in the part he is playing in the historical
crises of his own time be making mistakes a thousand times more serious
and less excusable.</p>
<p>The United Irishmen waited too long, the
Young Irelanders waited too long, the Fenians waited too long. This is
the opinion of every student of history worthy of the name. But who dare
censure these brave men and women? Assuredly not the men and women of
our generation. To us also a great opportunity has come. Have we been
wise? The future alone can tell.</p>
<p>In these days of March let us
remember that generations, like individuals, will find their ultimate
justification or condemnation not in what they accomplished but rather
in what they aspired and dared to attempt to accomplish. The generation
or the individual that is stricken down in the attempt to achieve a high
and holy thing is itself therefore high and holy. By aspiring to reach a
height the generation or the individual places its soul unassailably
upon that height, even should its body be trampled in the mud at its
base. Upon what height or in what sunless depth of corruption has this
generation placed its soul?</p>
<p>Judged by the record of its
Parliamentary Party, its public press, its capitalist class, this
generation of Irish men and women has sunk to a lower depth that has yet
been reached by any white race under the sun. Judged by the marvellous
fight they have made to save the Irish cause in all its integrity and
historic <pb n="155"/> purity, those who have stood for an independent
Ireland have climbed higher against greater odds than ever before were
brought to bear against the soul of a people.</p>
<p>Is it not an
awe-inspiring, but yet glorious thought, that somewhere above the souls
of those martyrs whom Ireland gave to the cause of freedom in March are
weighing and judging the actions of those who invoke their memories in
March, 1916. Shall our souls rest eternally on the heights with them or
in the depths with their betrayers?</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-03-11">March 11, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="156"/>
<div1 n="34" type="article">
<head>The Slackers</head>
<div2 n="1" type="section">
<p>Ireland is in the throes
of a new invasion. But whereas all other invasions have been invasions
of fighting men, this last invasion is an invasion of men who have
declined to fight.</p>
<p>Since the passing of the military service law
and its coming into force in England this country has been flooded daily
with fresh hordes of English and Scotch, who have run away from military
service in their own country and settled down like a swarm of locusts
upon Ireland.<note n="1" type="end" resp="auth"><q>Here in Ireland we have another kind of
dilution of labour. Everywhere since the conscription act was first
mooted there has been a rush of Englishmen and Scotsmen to Ireland to
escape the military net. These Englishmen and Scotsmen&mdash;let us call
them Brit-Huns for short&mdash;are appearing as if by magic in every
sort of <pb n="159"/> job hitherto held by Irishmen. There is not a week
and scarcely a day, that goes by without some unfortunate Irishmen being
told by his employer that the firm is going to reduce its staff, and
that his services are therefore no longer required. He goes, and in a
day or two a Brit-Hun appears in his place&hellip;all up
and down the city the loyal capitalists are weeding out Irishmen and
slyly substituting English and Scots&mdash;Brit-Huns&mdash;in their
places. The Irish are wanted to fight the battles of the tottering
British Empire&mdash;to set the <q>glorious exam-
ple</q> of dying for the Empire that denies their country the merest
shadow of national freedom&mdash;and as the Irish will not go willingly
they must be starved into going&hellip;. It is a new
plantation, this time with the blessing and connivance of the
Parliamentary leaders of the Irish race at home and abroad. And as the
Brit-Huns come in the Irish boys march out in khaki, puzzled, misled,
betrayed, the wonder of the world for stupidity, and the despair of
their country&hellip;. It is the product of crime and
folly&mdash;of British crime and Irish folly</q>.
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-02-05">February 5, 1916</date>.</bibl></note></p>
<p>Simultaneously with
this invasion by British shirkers we have witnessed a concerted and
sustained effort on the part of the Labour Exchanges, and also on the
part of firms in England under Government control, to entice able-
bodied Irishmen out of Ireland to work in England. Advertisements are
appearing in the daily press calling for the services of Irishmen to
work in England, some even particularising Dublin men as being the kind
of men they want. Thus we find that young able-bodied Irishmen are being
seduced out of Ireland after being denied work on the grounds that they
were fit for military service, and even whilst they leave Ireland in
despair the country is filling up with cowardly runaways from England
for whom these same employers are gladly finding employment at the jobs
they refused to give Irishmen.</p>
<p>We are aware some captious critics
will say that it is a new position for the Editor of the <title>Workers' Republic</title> to take to calling
men cowardly runaways because they are trying to evade conscription.
Whoever does so misses the whole point of our complaint. We are against
conscription until we have <pb n="157"/> something worth defending. The
British workers, no more than the Irish, have not any stake in <q>their</q> Empire worth risking their lives to defend.
That we freely grant.</p>
<p>But that being the case the duty of English
workers is to stay at home and fight conscription, not to run away from
that fight. We here in Ireland have been exempted from conscription for
the present because, and only because, the best fighting material in the
country have got arms in their hands and would have resisted
conscription to the last drop of their blood. We have always admitted
that we cannot remain at peace if the British Government wants us to
fight. That Government can force us to fight whether we like or not. But
neither that Government, nor any other Government, can decide for us
<emph>the place where we are going to fight</emph>, if fight
we must. And the best men in Ireland, the only men whom the Ireland of
the future will care to remember, have decided long ago that if they
must fight they will fight in Ireland, for Ireland, and under Ireland's
flag.<note n="2" type="end" resp="DR">Writing to decline an invitation to speak at a
Glasgow anti-conscription meeting from Arthur McManus, Connolly, <date value="1915-11-23">November 23, 1915</date>, used almost the same words.
(See <title>Socialist</title>, Edinburgh, <date value="1919-04-17">April 17, 1919</date>. <title>James Connolly, Socialist and
Revolutionary</title>, A. McManus.)</note></p>
<p>The knowledge
of these facts has temporarily saved Ireland from conscription. There
are in England and Scotland thousands of young men eligible for military
service who have banded themselves together to resist conscription. All
honour to them! These men are upholding the sanctity of the individual
soul against the tyranny of empires. As rebels ourselves we cannot
refuse them our admiration. But what shall we say of the thousands of
young, able-bodied English, Scots, and Welsh, now settling down upon
Ireland&mdash;recreants, runaways, traitors to both sides, who will
neither fight under conscription, nor fight against it! Loyalists to a
man, jingoes and <q>Rule Britannia</q> shouters every
last one of them, they form the bulk of the audience at all West British
functions, and spore the colours of the British Army on their persons as
they parade our streets. But they are here to take our jobs, to take the
bread out of the mouths of Irishmen whilst using those same <pb n="158"/>
Irishmen to go and fight for the Empire. Surely such unmitigated curs
are typical products of Empire&mdash;of an Empire that has accustomed
itself to the practice of hiring slaves to fight freemen.</p>
<p>We
wonder what is thought of these slackers and recreants by those Irish
men and women whose relatives are at present risking their lives in the
British Army, or have already lost life or limb in the British service.
What a picture! Irish soldiers fighting for England; English slackers
staying at home to grab the jobs of Irish soldiers. And Irish employers
driving out Irishmen of military age to serve the Empire, and giving
their jobs to Englishmen and Scotsmen who refuse to risk their precious
skins for the Empire.</p>
<p>No work in Ireland for Irishmen, lots of
work in Ireland for Brit-Huns&mdash;every ship that goes to England
carrying away Irish men to jobs in England; every ship that comes to
Ireland carrying over Brit-Huns to jobs in Ireland.</p>
<p>Was ever a
nation so beset?</p>
<p>And John E. Redmond's appeal for recruits to
fight for this British Empire which these Britishers refuse to fight for
is pasted on every hoarding and dead wall in the country.</p>
<p>If the
devil is not immortal he must surely die of laughing at the work of his
agents in Ireland.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-03-11">March 11, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
<div2 n="2" type="section">
<p>We have received the following
letter from a correspondent in Glasgow. We gladly publish it in order
that our readers may have the pleasure of seeing us pilloried by an able
writer, and judge for themselves as to the correctness of our position.
<text>
<body>
<opener>To the Editor of <title>The
Workers' Republic</title>. <salute>Dear
Comrade,</salute></opener>
<p>As a regular and admiring reader of the
<title>Republic</title>, permit me to express my
disappointment with your leading article, entitled <title>The Slackers</title>, in which you criticise
those young <pb n="160"/> men who are landing in Ireland to escape
conscription. You dip your pen in vitriol and in the most intemperate
language denounce them as slackers, recreants, cowardly runaways,
Brit-Huns, and unmitigated curs.</p>
<p>Before opening your flood-gates
of abuse you would surely make certain of your ground, and although you
do not produce it, you doubtless possess abundant evidence that the men
you denounce are everything you brand them. You have enjoyed their
acquaintance for a few days now, and must have collected extensive proof
that they are the `curs' you so charitably describe them to be. I would
not ask you to produce this proof, only your lurid description does not
tally with the impression of the men I formed during years of associ-
ation with them.</p>
<p>You tell us the new arrivals are English, Welsh,
and Scotch. Well, they were Irish when they sailed from here. Irish to a
man. Fifty of my personal acquaintances are now basking in your
comradely scowls. Half of them are Irish born and have returned to their
natal roof-trees. The other half are born of Irish parents and have
crossed to the hospitality of relatives. They don't sing <q>Rule Britannia</q>. They never sport the loyal colours.
They duly <q>hate England</q>, and although they came
here some years ago to steal the jobs (by selling their labour cheap)
and <q>take the bread out of the mouths</q> of
Scotchmen, they are not willing to be pressed into the Army if by the
simple device of changing their locus they can evade it.</p>
<p>You are
opposed to conscription. So are they. You say they should remain in
Britain and fight against it. Don't you know the fight is over?
Conscription has won. It is the law of the land. Those who fought
against the Bill must now enter the Army, or devise some means of
avoiding it. There are only two ways of keeping out of the Army&mdash;to
step into prison or over to Ireland. Scotch <pb n="161"/> and English
resisters will go to prison; those who have friends in Ireland are
choosing the lesser punishment of returning to their native land.</p>
<p>Whose applause do you hope to gain by such an article? What are your
motives for writing in a strain that does you so little credit? If you
believe it is wrong to join the Army, why deny a refuge to those who
believe with you? If you believe the Irish workers are poor because of
capitalist oppression, why mislead them to regard the Scotch and English
workers, who may compete for jobs, as the authors of Irish misery.</p>
<p><q>Glasgow Reader</q></p>
</body>
</text></p>
<p> <text>
<body>
<head>OUR ANSWER:</head>
<p>The above is about the
most amusing criticism we have ever come across. The writer coolly
ignores our very explicit description of the men whom we attacked in our
article, and proceeds to a totally unnecessary defence of people whom we
did not attack. Then he waxes eloquent in defence of those men whom we
did not attack. It is easy being virtuously indignant over an article if
you persist in denying the facts upon which the article is based, and
spread your ink over a totally different series of facts, that have
nothing to do with the case.</p>
<p>For example: Our critic says the
people whom he is defending <q>Don't sing <q>Rule
Britannia</q>, don't sport the loyal colours</q>. But the people whom
we were attacking <emph>do</emph> sport the loyal colours, and
<emph>do</emph> sing <q>Rule Britannia</q>,
and <emph>do</emph> shout for the war, and <emph>are</emph> blatant jingoes to a man; they are not Irish
refugees returning to the land of their birth, or the land of their
fathers. Oh, no, they are boys of the bull-dog breed, publicly and
privately asserting that Irishmen should go out to fight for the Empire
they will not shed their own blood to defend.</p>
<p>Dublin, Ireland, is
rotten with these carrion; our patriotic jingo employers are continually
discharging Irishmen and <pb n="162"/> filling up their jobs with English
and Scots and Welsh, and these Brit-Huns are neither socialists,
radicals, no conscription fellowship members, nor people who believe
with us that it is wrong to join the Army. So why does our <q>Glasgow Reader</q> get so excited, and indulge in such
unworthy insinuations about our <q>motives</q>, and ask
<q>whose applause do we hope to gain</q>, etc. He may be proud of his
deftness in making such insinuations; we are willing he should enjoy all
the credit of such literary finesse.</p>
<p>His last sentence is a gem
of illogical and topsy-turvy reasoning. Let us repeat it: <q>If you
believe the Irish workers are poor because of capitalist oppression why
mislead them to regard the Scotch and English workers who may compete
for jobs as the authors of Irish misery?</q></p>
<p>Is not that a gem?
Here is the position. The capitalist class of these countries have
committed a great international crime. We stand solidly alongside of
all those in Ireland who have opposed that crime from its inception to
its latest development, and we have opposed and denounced all those who
in Ireland have been accomplices of that crime whether those accomplices
were of our own class, our nearest and dearest friends, or members of
the exploiting classes.</p>
<p>Our attitude to parties in Great Britain
has been exactly the same. We have encouraged the enemies of the war,
and have exposed and denounced its friends and sponsors, regardless of
the class to which they belong.</p>
<p>But because some of the shouters
for the war, some of the blatant jingoes and union-jackers came over to
Ireland, to help their rulers to depopulate Ireland by grabbing our jobs
whilst our brothers are elbowed out to starve or enlist, our critic has
nothing but covert insults for us when we dare to criticise them. <emph>He</emph> criticises the same element in Glasgow; <pb n="163"/> insinuates that we are misleading the Irish workers when we
criticise them after they have crossed the channel. So a Scotch jingo in
Glasgow is fair game for a socialist writer, but when he crosses to
Dublin we have to look upon him as a sacred person&mdash;to attack whom
is an offence against internationalism. A jingo is a jingo wherever we
meet him, and as far as we are concerned there is no close season for
jingoes. Nor game preserve in which they may not be hunted.</p>
<p>Our
critic has allowed his generous sympathies for his comrades who have
returned to Ireland to becloud his mind. We did not attack them. We know
many of the Irish refugees who have left Great Britain for Ireland
rather than serve in the British Army, and we admire them and welcome
them in our midst. We know also some English and Scotch fighters who
have been against the war from the start, have braved unpopularity with
their own countrymen in opposing it, and if they find that they can
continue their fighting better in Ireland than in Great Britain they
also are welcome. But neither of these classes of immigrants into
Ireland were in our mind when we wrote our article, and nothing but the
most jaundiced imagination or the most slipshod reading could make the
article apply to them.</p>
<p>And finally, let us say that we are sick
of the canting talk of those who tell us that we must not blame the
British people for the crimes of their rulers against Ireland. We do
blame them. In so far as they support the system of society which makes
it profitable for one nation to connive at the subjection of another
nation they are responsible for every crime committed to maintain that
subjection.</p>
<p>If there is any section of the British people who
believe that Ireland would be justified in ending the British Empire if
she could, in order to escape from thraldom to it, then that section may
hold itself guiltless of any crime against Ireland. But if <pb n="164"/>
there is any such section, how small and utterly insignificant it is,
since it nowhere gives public proof of its existence.</p>
<p>Of all the
bodies called into existence by the fight against the war, and against
conscription, is there one British organisation that claims for Ireland
(or would even allow to Ireland) the same right to determine its
national fate as all the British peace parties insist upon being secured
to Belgium? There is not one.</p>
<p>The burden of all their cries is
that no <emph>further</emph> conquests must be made. This
means that all countries conquered before the war should remain
conquered, subject countries. Especially does it mean that the British
Empire should remain intact, and in possession of all its plunder.</p>
<p>This pirate Empire holds as a subject population, unrepresented in
any parliament, one-sixth of the human race. Whosoever is of any of
these subject races and dares to aspire to an existence for his country
apart from the British Empire is seized as a criminal, and imprisoned or
executed by our rulers. India, Egypt, Ireland, have all supplied
examples in recent years. Yet this pirate crew who have seized upon and
held in bondage this vast mass of humanity, one-sixth of the human race;
who treat as a crime the noblest aspirations of freedom amongst that
mass, the crew of this pirate Empire have always the enthusiastic
support of the people of Great Britain in frustrating any attempt of a
subject population to escape from the Empire.</p>
<p>As the glutton who
has gorged himself to suffocation demands that everybody else should
rise from the table so the <q>noblest minds of
England</q> declare against further conquests by any of their national
rivals. An Empire whose sword is ever drinking blood in some part of the
world poses as the champion of the nations against the doctrine of
force.</p>
<p>Such hypocrisy! We will believe in the guiltlessness of
the British people when their spokesmen dare to recognise publicly that
the British Empire cannot last, and so recognise the right <pb n="165"/>
of each one of its subject nations to be itself by the aid of any ally
it can attach to its side.</p>
<p>For our part we take our stand openly
upon the fundamental truth that Ireland is a subject nation, and that
therefore Ireland has no national enemy in Europe save one, and that one
is the nation that holds her in subjection.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-03-25">March 25, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</body>
</text></p>
</div2>
</div1>
<pb n="166"/>
<div1 n="35" type="article">
<head>The national Festival</head>
<p>The question
often arises: Why do Irishmen celebrate the festival of their national
saint, in view of the recently re-discovered truth that he was by no
means the first missionary to preach christianity to the people of
Ireland? It is known now beyond the shadow of a doubt that the christian
religion had been preached and practised in Ireland long before St.
Patrick, that christian churches had been established, and it is
probable that the legend about the shamrock was invented in some later
generation than that of the saint. Certainly the shamrock bears no place
of any importance in early celtic literature, and the first time we
read of it as having any reference to or bearing on religion in Ireland
occurs in the work of a foreigner&mdash;and English monk.</p>
<p>But all
that notwithstanding there is good reason why Irish men and women should
celebrate St. Patrick's Day. They should celebrate it for the same
reason as they should honour the green flag of Ireland, despite the fact
that there is no historical proof that the Irish, in the days of
Ireland's freedom from foreign rule, ever had a green flag as a national
standard, or indeed ever had a national flag at all.</p>
<p>The claim of
the 17th of March to be Ireland's national festival, the claim of St.
Patrick to be Ireland's national saint, the claim of the shamrock to be
Ireland's national plant, the claim of the green flag to be Ireland's
national flag rests not on the musty pages of half-forgotten history but
on the affections and will of the Irish people.</p>
<p>Sentiment it
may be. But the man or woman who scoffs at sentiment is a fool. We on
this paper respect facts, and have a holy hatred of all movements and
causes not built upon truth. But sentiment is often greater than facts,
because it is an idealised <pb n="167"/> expression of fact&mdash;a mind
picture of truth as it is seen by the soul, unhampered by the grosser
dirt of the world and the flesh.</p>
<p>The Irish people, denied comfort
in the present, seek solace in the past of their country; the Irish
mind, unable because of the serfdom or bondage of the Irish race to give
body and material existence to its noblest thoughts, creates an emblem
to typify that spiritual conception for which the Irish race laboured in
vain. If that spiritual conception of religion, of freedom, of
nationality exists or existed nowhere save in the Irish mind, it is
nevertheless as much a great historical reality as if it were embodied
in a statute book, or had a material existence vouched for by all the
pages of history.</p>
<p>It is not the will of the majority which
ultimately prevails; that which ultimately prevails is the ideal of the
noblest of each generation. Happy indeed that race and generation in
which the ideal of the noblest and the will of the majority unite.</p>
<p>In this hour of her trial Ireland cannot afford to sacrifice any one
of the things the world has accepted as peculiarly Irish. She must hold
to her highest thoughts, and cleave to her noblest sentiments. Her sons
and daughters must hold life itself as of little value when weighed
against the preservation of even the least important work of her
separate individuality as a nation.</p>
<p>Therefore we honour St.
Patrick's Day (and its allied legend of the shamrock) because in it we
see the spiritual conception of the separate identity of the Irish
race&mdash;an ideal of unity in diversity, of diversity not con-
flicting with unity.</p>
<p>Magnificent must have been the intellect
that conceived such a thought; great must have been the genius of the
people that received such a conception and made it their own.</p>
<p>On
this Festival then our prayer is: Honour to St. Patrick the <emph>Irish</emph> Apostle, and Freedom to his people.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers Republic</title>, <date value="1916-03-18">March 18, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="168"/>
<div1 n="36" type="article">
<head>The Call to Arms</head>
<div2 n="1" type="section">
<p>On <date value="1916-03-24">Friday, March 24th, 1916</date>, Dublin was the
startled witness of a sudden mobilisation of the Irish Citizen Army in
the middle of a working day&mdash;a mobilisation in response to a call
coming with the most dramatic unexpectedness. Never was the call so
sudden, never was the response swifter or more reassuring in its promise
for the future.</p>
<p>For some occult and inexplicable reason the
British Government decided upon the instant suppression of a nationalist
journal, <title>The Gael</title>. The journal in
question was the latest recruit to the ranks of true Irish journalism,
and circulated mostly in the south and midland counties, but as far as
we are aware had not in any sense exceeded the limits of candid and
outspoken criticism of those who govern Ireland, and those who support
them. It was not jingo, it was Irish, but quietly and thoroughly
educational rather than aggressive.</p>
<p>But swift upon the decision
of the Government a body of military and police raided the premises of
the printers in Liffey Street, seized all the type forms, dismantled the
machinery, and carried all the vital parts off to Dublin Castle along
with all books and papers connected or believed to be connected with the
journal. No explanation was given other than a notification that action
was taken by virtue of a warrant from General Friend.<note n="1" type="end" resp="DR">Commander of the British forces in Ireland. </note></p>
<p>Simultaneously with this raid the police all over the city entered
the shops of newsagents, and totally without warrant or legal sanction
proceeded to search their premises and confiscate all copies of <title>The Gael</title> they could find. Right here
in their illegal and bullying proceedings they encountered their first
reverse.</p>
<p>A number of the Dublin Metropolitan Police entered the<pb n="169"/>
 shop of the Workers' Co-Operative Society at 31, Eden Quay,
and demanded all copies of <title>The
Gael</title>. The little girl in charge was not at all daunted by
the bullying of the uniformed daylight burglars and coolly answered that
she had no authority to give up the property placed in her charge. Then
the policemen proceeded to rummage around among the papers. Meanwhile
word of the raid had been sent to Mr. James Connolly, who is also
Manager of the Workers' Co-Operative Society, and he arrived on the
scene just as one of the police got in behind the counter. Inquiring if
the police had any warrant they answered that they had not. On hearing
this, Mr. Connolly turning to the policeman behind the counter as he had
lifted up a bundle of papers, covered him with an automatic pistol and
quietly said:</p>
<p><q>Then drop those papers, or I'll drop you</q>. He
dropped the papers. Then he was ordered out from behind the counter, and
he cleared. His fellow burglar tried to be insolent and was quickly told
that as they had no search warrant they were doing an illegal act, and
the first one who ventured to touch a paper would be shot like a dog.
After some more parley they slunk away vowing vengeance.</p>
<p>Immediately they had gone the Countess Markievicz arrived with news
of the raid upon the printing plant of <title>The
Gael</title>, and in the belief that this was a prelude to a
further general suppression as in 1914,<note n="2" type="end" resp="DR">The suppression
of <title>The Irish Worker</title>, <title>Sinn F&eacute;in</title>, <title>Irish Freedom</title> and <title>Ireland</title> in December, 1914. </note>
it was resolved to mobilise the Irish Citizen Army to protect the <title>Workers' Republic</title> and Liberty
Hall.</p>
<p>Whilst the mobilisation papers were being signed, there
came a fresh invasion of police headed by a sergeant and with
reinforcements of the police. This invasion was met in the same manner
with a request for the production of the warrant. The sergeant said he
could assure Mr. Connolly that a warrant was issued, but was told that
the reputation for veracity of the police was not good enough for his
word to be taken without the document. As the police saw that the forces
of the defenders <pb n="170"/> had been augmented, and the Countess
amongst others was lovingly toying with a large automatic whilst a
number of rifles were peeping round the corner, the sergeant concluded
that we had <q>reason</q> on our side and withdrew.</p>
<p>After they had withdrawn<corr resp="DMD" sic="">,</corr> the office
staff wondering what article in <title>The
Gael</title> had caused such an action on the part of the British
Government, resolved to look through the paper and see. But lo, and
behold, we discovered that the current issue had not yet arrived, none
but old copies were on the premises, and consequently <emph>we had been fighting the police to keep them from taking
from us papers that we had not got</emph>. We were like Irishmen fighting
for freedom in Flanders, and not knowing what it means at home.</p>
<p>Just as we made this discovery we were <q>honoured</q> by a visit from Inspector Bannon and a
largely augmented force of constables, all ready for business. To our
civil inquiry for his authority the Inspector produced the document in
question and proceeded to read it for our benefit, whilst both parties
stood lovingly eyeing each other, with their fingers upon the triggers
of their weapons. The warrant produced by the Inspector was the original
warrant for the seizure of <title>The
Gael</title>, and its concluding paragraph authorised the police
and military to enter all newsagents' shops, and seize all copies of the
paper they could discover.</p>
<p>As we had just discovered that we had
none of the paper in the shop we informed the Inspector in our politest
manner that he could search the shop for it as he had brought the
warrant, but would not be allowed to search Liberty Hall, <q>warrant or
no warrant</q>. To which the Inspector answered that he would not dream
of entering Liberty Hall. We believe him, but they were not always as
considerate. No search at all was made, beyond a mere formal turning
over of the papers on the counter.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the messengers with
the call to arms had been <pb n="171"/> speeding all over the city, and
everywhere the boys responded in the most loyal manner. In the machine
shops of the railways, in factories, in the dockyard, along the docks,
in the holds of coal boats, in stables, on carts, lorries and yokes of
every description, in buildings in process of erection, the call reached
the men, and on the instant tools were dropped, work abandoned, coats
hastily snatched up, and within five minutes of receiving the summons
the men were on their way despite the threats, promises, or supplication
of foremen, bosses, superintendents or owners. Staid middle-class men in
the streets, aristocratic old ladies out shopping, well-fed Government
officials returning from lunch were transfixed with horror when they
beheld the spectacle of working men with grimy faces and dirty working
clothes rushing excitedly through the streets with rifle in hand and
bandolier across shoulders, on the way to Liberty Hall. Visions of
guillotines in College Green, and battues of loyal sweaters fleeted
across their visions, and Dublin Castle and the Viceregal Lodge were
immediately attacked by batteries of telephone calls imploring the
British authorities for news.</p>
<p>In an hour from the first issue of
the summons Liberty Hall was garrisoned by a hundred and fifty
determined armed men, and more were trooping in every few minutes. It
was splendid to see the enthusiasm of the men, and when in the course of
the evening all the Women's Ambulance Corps trooped in, closely fol-
lowed by the Boy Scouts, excitement and longing for the battle was
running high in all our veins. The Irish Volunteers also were on the
alert and stood, we are informed, under arms until after two a.m. on
<date value="1916-03-26">Sunday</date> morning. Since then Liberty Hall
has been guarded day and night.</p>
<p>All through <date value="1916-03-25">Saturday</date> the wildest rumours were current, but
at Liberty Hall everything was quiet. The men were on the job, and every
man was confident of his neighbour as well as himself.</p>
<p>It is
understood that every military preparation was made <pb n="172"/> for an
attack upon Liberty Hall, but the preparations were countermanded at the
last moment. This is confirmed by a writer in the Belfast <title>Northern Whig</title> of Tuesday, <date value="1916-03-28">March 28th</date>.</p>
<p>The Royal Irish
Constabulary in Portobello Barracks professed to be anxious to attack
us, but the soldiers, being soldiers and not professional spies and
bullies like the R.I.C. did not express any desire to make war upon
their own countrymen.</p>
<p>The British Government thought to make a
coup that would demoralise the national forces, and suppress all their
papers but they reckoned without the splendid discipline of the armed
manhood of Ireland.</p>
<p>So endeth the first chapter. Who will write
the next?</p>
</div2>
<div2 type="section">
<head>SEQUEL</head>
<p>As a sequel to this
military raid upon the liberties of the Irish people, and as a counter
to her activities at Liberty Hall the Countess Markievicz was served
with a notice from General Friend forbidding her to enter the County
Kerry for the purpose of delivering a lecture at Tralee on Sunday, <date value="1916-03-26">March 26th</date>. As we had no desire to hear of our
comrade being arrested at some obscure railway station on the way
down, and interned, another lady was sent in her place with a message.
This messenger, Miss Marie Perolz, got safely through, and had the time
of her life entertaining policemen, soldiers and detectives who
informed her that she was a Russian subject, etc., in the apparent
belief that they were interviewing Madam Markievicz.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-04-01">April 1, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div2>
</div1>
<pb n="173"/>
<div1 n="37" type="article">
<head>The Irish Flag</head>
<p>The Council of the Irish Citizen Army has resolved
after grave and earnest deliberation, to hoist the green flag of Ireland
over Liberty Hall, as over a fortress held for Ireland by the arms of
Irishmen.</p>
<p>This is a momentous decision in the most serious crisis
Ireland has witnessed in our day and generation. It will, we are sure,
send a thrill through the hearts of every true Irish man and woman, and
send the red blood coursing fiercely along the veins of every lover of
the race.</p>
<p>It means that in the midst of and despite the treasons
and backslidings of leaders and guides, in the midst of and despite all
the weaknesses, corruption and moral cowardice of a section of the
people, in the midst of and despite all this there still remains in
Ireland a spot where a body of true men and women are ready to hoist,
gather round, and defend the flag made sacred by all the sufferings of
all the martyrs of the past.</p>
<p>Since this unholy war first started
we have seen every symbol of Irish freedom desecrated to the purposes of
the enemy, we have witnessed the prostitution of every holy Irish
tradition. That the young men of Ireland might be seduced into the
service of the nation that denies every national power to their country,
we have seen appeals made to our love of freedom, to our religious
instincts, to our sympathy for the oppressed, to our kinship with
suffering.</p>
<p>The power that for seven hundred years has waged
bitter and unrelenting war upon the freedom of Ireland, and that still
declares that the rights of Ireland must forever remain subordinate to
the interests of the British Empire, hypocritically appealed to our
young men to enlist under her banner and shed their blood <q>in the
interests of freedom</q>.</p>
<pb n="174"/>
<p>The power whose reign in
Ireland has been one long carnival of corruption and debauchery of civic
virtue, and which has rioted in the debasement and degradation of
everything Irish men and wonder hold sacred, appealed to us in the name
of religion to fight for her as the champion of christendom.</p>
<p>The
power which holds in subjection more of the world's population than any
other power on the globe, and holds them in subjection as slaves without
any guarantee of freedom or power of self-government, this power that
sets Catholic against Protestant, the Hindu against the Mohammedan, the
yellow man against the brown, and keeps them quarrelling with each other
whilst she robs and murders them all&mdash;this power appeals to Ireland
to send her sons to fight under England's banner for the cause of the
oppressed. The power whose rule in Ireland has made of Ireland a desert,
and made the history of our race read like the records of a shambles, as
she plans for the annihilation of another race appeals to our manhood to
fight for her because of our sympathy for the suffering, and of our
hatred of oppression.</p>
<p>For generations the shamrock was banned as
a national emblem of Ireland, but in her extremity England uses the
shamrock as a means for exciting in foolish Irishmen loyalty to England.
For centuries the green flag of Ireland was a thing accurst and hated by
the English garrison in Ireland, as it is still in their inmost hearts.
But in India, in Egypt, in Flanders, in Gallipoli, the green flag is
used by our rulers to encourage Irish soldiers of England to give up
their lives for the power that denies their country the right of
nationhood. Green flags wave over recruiting offices in Ireland and
England as a bait to lure on poor fools to dishonourable deaths in
England's uniform.</p>
<p>The national press of Ireland, the true
national press, uncorrupted and unterrified, has largely succeeded in
turning back the tide of demoralisation, and opening up the minds of the
Irish public to a realisation of the truth about the position <pb n="175"/> of their country in the war. The national press of Ireland is a
real flag of freedom flying for Ireland despite the enemy, but it is
well that also there should fly in Dublin the green flag of this country
as a rallying point of our forces and embodiment of all our hopes. Where
better could that flag fly than over the unconquered citadel of the
Irish working class, Liberty Hall, the fortress of the militant working
class of Ireland.</p>
<p>We are out for Ireland for the Irish. But who
are the Irish? Not the rack-renting, slum-owning landlord; not the
sweating, profit-grinding capitalist; not the sleek and oily lawyer;
not the prostitute pressman&mdash;the hired liars of the enemy. Not
these are the Irish upon whom the future depends. Not these, but the
Irish working class, the only secure foundation upon which a free nation
can be reared.</p>
<p>The cause of labour is the cause of Ireland, the
cause of Ireland is the cause of labour. They cannot be dissevered.
Ireland seeks freedom. Labour seeks that an Ireland free should be the
sole mistress of her own destiny, supreme owner of all material things
within and upon her soil. Labour seeks to make the free Irish nation the
guardian of the interests of the people of Ireland, and to secure that
end would vest in that free Irish nation all property rights as
against the claims of the individual, with the end in view that the
individual may be enriched by the nation, and not by the spoiling of his
fellows.</p>
<p>Having in view such a high and holy function for the
nation to perform, is it not well and fitting that we of the working
class should fight for the freedom of the nation from foreign rule, as
the first requisite for the free development of the national powers
needed for our class? It is so fitting. Therefore on Sunday, <date value="1916-04-16">April 16th, 1916</date>, the green flag of Ireland
will be solemnly hoisted over Liberty Hall as the symbol of our faith in
freedom, and as a token to all the world that the working class of
Dublin stands for the cause of Ireland, and the cause of Ireland is the
cause of a separate and distinct nationality.</p>
<pb n="176"/>
<p>In
these days of doubt, despair, and resurgent hope we fling our banner to
the breeze, the flag of our fathers, the symbol of our national
redemption, the sunburst shining over an Ireland re-born.</p>
<bibl><title>Workers' Republic</title>, <date value="1916-04-08">April 8, 1916</date>.</bibl>
</div1>
<pb n="177"/>
<div1 n="38" type="article">
<head>Last Statement of James Connolly</head>
<opener>To the Field General Court
Martial, held at Dublin Castle, on <date value="1916-05-09">May 9th,
1916</date>.</opener>
<p><add>(Evidence mainly went to
establish the fact that the accused, James Connolly, was in command at
the General Post office, and was also Commandant-General of the Dublin
Division. Two of the witnesses, however, strove to bring in alleged
instances of wantonly risking the lives of prisoners. The Court held
that these charges were <emph>irrelevant</emph> and could not
be placed against the prisoner.)</add></p>
<p>I do not wish to make any
defence except against charges of wanton cruelty to prisoners. These
trifling allegations that have been made, if they record acts that
really happened, deal only with the almost unavoidable incidents of a
hurried uprising against long established authority, and nowhere show
evidence of set purpose to wantonly injure unarmed persons.</p>
<p>We
went out to break the connection between this country and the British
Empire, and to establish an Irish Republic. We believed that the call we
then issued to the people of Ireland, was a nobler call, in a holier
cause, than any call issued to them during this war having any
connection with the war. We succeeded in proving that Irishmen are ready
to die endeavouring to win for Ireland those national rights which the
British Government has been asking them to die to win for Belgium. As
long as that remains the case, the cause of Irish freedom is safe.</p>
<p>Believing that the British Government has no right in Ireland, never
had any right in Ireland, and never can have any right in Ireland, the
presence, in any one generation of Irishmen, of even a respectable
minority, ready to die to affirm <pb n="178"/> that truth, makes that
Government for ever a usurpation and a crime against human progress.</p>
<p>I personally thank God that I have lived to see the day when
thousands of Irish men and boys, and hundreds of Irish women and girls,
were ready to affirm that truth, and to attest it with their lives if
need be.</p>
<closer><signed>JAMES CONNOLLY, <emph>Commandant-General, Dublin Division, Army of the Irish Republic</emph>.</signed></closer>
<cecinit>
<note type="end" resp="DR">This statement was handed by Connolly in Dublin Castle hospital on the eve of his execution to his daughter Nora.</note>
</cecinit>
</div1>
</div0>
</body>
</text>
</TEI.2>
