ePub 版

mis-government, and poverty deepened with the rapid growth of the native population till famine turned the country into a hell.' In such a hell no wonder that rebellion again broke out.

A hundred years of misrule and misery had gone. The time for deliverance came at last. An association, 100,000 strong, demanded a separate Parliament for Ireland, and England had no power to resist. Home Rule was established. The two kingdoms were now held together only by the fact that they had one sovereign. The period of independence lasted for eighteen years. No one acquainted with it can regard it as an improvement. The Parliament was not a representative one, but wholly in the hands of a selfish and despotic party. The aristocracy were corrupt, the commonality ferocious, the Government distracted, and the people divided. Some idea of the fitness of Ireland to govern itself may be formed from the fact that, owing to the factious ignorance of the Irish landowners, the Irish Parliament rejected Pitt's Bill for free trade, which, in the interests of Ireland, he had fought through the English Parliament against the fears and jealousies of the farmers and manufacturers of this country. Many Irish members are now guilty of similar suicidal conduct in opposing a Government which is more determined than any other we have ever had to give wise and just laws to their distracted country. Pitt was so discouraged that, but for the revolutionary struggle and the efforts of France to excite rebellion in Ireland, he would most likely have left that part of the United Kingdom to have reaped the fruit of its own doings.

In 1792, while Ireland still enjoyed Home Rule, there was another rising of the tide of social and religious passion, under the title of • United Irishmen.' The object of the movement was to obtain reforms in the Government; but many of the members were Republicans, and hoped to effect their designs by a revolution. Among the conspirators were Lord Edward Fitzgerald, Arthur O'Connor, Dr. McNiven, å physician ; Thomas Emmel, a barrister; and Oliver Bond, a merchant: They entered into a communication with France, which promised to send over a large body of troops. In 1796 the flame of insurrection broke out. It was fanned by the Orange Yeomanry and English troops, who marched through the country robbing, outraging, and murdering the insurgents wherever they found them. Atrocities were answered by atrocities. Protestants were lashed, tortured, and piked in their turn, and every soldier taken was butchered without mercy. An immense slaughter of the rebels at Enniscorthy partly terminated the contest and secured peace. The scenes of cruelty and suffering witnessed in this struggle cannot be described. The French troops,

arriving when it was too late, were surrounded and made prisoners of war.

Pitt saw that Ireland must either be made something of or let alone. He resolved to put a stop to the miserable farce of independence. The necessity of a thorough union of the two kingdoms, or no union at all, was brought home to every English statesman by the erratic and arbitrary conduct of the Irish Parliament, which was determined, whether in the right or wrong, to oppose whatever the English Parliament did. A Bill was drawn up to the effect that England and Ireland should have but one Parliament, and that in London. After much discussion and a stubborn resistance by the borough mongers of the sister isle, the Bill was carried in both the English and the Irish Parliaments, the latter being mainly bought with money and a liberal distribution of pensions and peerages to its members. It came into force in January, 1801. It provided that four lords spiritual and twenty-eight lords temporal, elected by the Irish Peers, should be life members of the House of Lords, and that one hundred Irish members should be added to the House of Commons; and that the churches of the two islands should be united as one Protestant Episcopal Church.

This measure did not remedy all evils in Ireland. For about thirty years there was a state of continual unrest. Coercion and insurrection acts were in force most of the time. To remove one cause of Irish grievance in 1829, Sir Robert Peel introduced the Catholic Relief Bill. For several years the question of Catholic emancipation had been gaining ground. Though the Roman Catholics were five to one of the Protestants, yet they were treated as foreigners in their own country. The House of Lords, the House of Commons, voting for representatives in Parliament, the magistracy, all corporate offices in towns, all ranks in the army, the bench, and the bar, the whole administration of Government or justice were closed against Papists; and, by the sweeping confiscations which had been made at different times, there were few Catholic landlords left. No Protestant in Ireland was allowed to instruct any Papist. By Eighth Act of Anne, no Papist was allowed to teach any other Papist. By Seventh William III., no Papist was allowed to be sent out of Ireland to receive instruction. By these statutes nearly the whole body of the Irish people were legislatively prohibited from receiving any instruction whatever, either from a Potestant or a Catholic, either at home or abroad. The darkest and most profound ignorance was enforced under the severest penalties. Even so late as the Twelfth Act George I., any Catholic clergyman marrying a Protestant and a Catholic was to be hanged. By Seventh

George II., any barrister marrying a Catholic was to be disbarred. By Second Anne, Papist clergymen going into Ireland and performing religious exercises were to be hanged. By Eighth Anne, fifty pounds reward was to be given to all informers against Catholic Bishops and vicars-general. Perhaps the most extraordinary of these penal statutes were those of Seventh William III. No Papist to ride a horse worth more than £5; and Ninth George II., Papists residing in Ireland shall make good to Protestants all losses sustained by any Catholic King ravaging the coasts of Ireland, and Twenty-ninth George II., which required barristers and attorneys to waive their privilege and betray their clients if Papists. In fact, nearly all rights of citizenship were denied the Papists. Wolfe Tone is within the bounds of truth when he affirms that there was no injustice, no disgrace, no disqualification, moral, political, or religious, civil or military, that was not heaped upon them. This horrible system, pursued for above a century with unrelenting acrimony and perseverance, had wrought its full effect, and had, in fact, reduced the great body of the Catholic peasantry of Ireland to a situation, morally and physically speaking, below the beasts of the field. The spirit of their few remaining gentry was broken and their mind degraded, and it was only in a class of their merchants and traders and a few members of the medical profession, who had smuggled an education in spite of the penal code, that anything like political life survived. Hardly any durst express a wish to have their rights restored to them. It was surely time for some relaxation of this wicked system to be effected. The Relief Bill caused a profound sensation. The Tories fought desperately against it. Even the Duke of Wellington, though himself an Irishman, opposed it, but at length gave way. The Bill passed triumphantly through both Houses, and the Catholics and the Presbyterians, for they had been under similar disadvantages, were politically free.

A few years after the Emancipation Act the enthusiastic and eloquent Irishman, Daniel O'Connell, headed an association for the repeal of the union. The old cry was raised that the country would never do any good until separated from England. Certainly the circumstances of the people, both temporally and morally, were deplorable in the extreme. Gustave de Beaumont, an eminent Frenchman, who visited Ireland in 1835, said, I have seen the Indian in his forests and the negro in his chains, and I thought that I beheld the lowest term of human misery; but I did not then know the lot of Ireland. Irish misery forms a type by itself of which there exists Lowhere else either model or imitation. In seeing it one recognises that no theoretical limits can be assigned to the misfortunes of nations.' Mr. Inglis, who spoke from observation, said, “The condition of the Irish poor is immeasurably worse than that of the West Indian slave.' Mr. Barrow, who made an extensive tour in Ireland in 1835, said,

There is no other country on the face of the earth where such extreme misery prevails as in Ireland.' It would be easy to give similar quotations from authentic accounts down to the year 1880. Hence, it is not surprising that men like Daniel O'Connell, who was educated in France, and Smith O'Brian, and Charles Gavan Duffy, who, by the way, is now one of Her Majesty's loyal subjects in Victoria, and has twice filled the office of Prime Minister there and received, as recognition of his services, the order of Knighthood, should endeavour, even by unlawful means, if others were not likely to be effectual, to save their country from such appalling misery.

The chief events of Irish history since those days are within the memory of many persons now living. They are the great famine of 1847 and 1848, the horrors of which it would take volumes to describe; the Fenian rising in 1866; the Disestablishment and Disendowment of the Irish Church, and the Land Act under the Gladstone Ministry ; and, lastly, the Land League with agrarian riots, incendiarisms, Boycotting, murders, and assassinations, and which is, perhaps, the strongest, most bostile, and formidable organisation with which the Government has ever had to deal in Ireland. The history of the English in the Emerald Isle is one which no man can read without feelings of humiliation and shame. We are responsible for the wretched and disaffected condition of the people. English mis-rule has borne this bitter fruit in Ireland, and the present landlords, no less than the tenants, are, for the most part, the innocent victims of it. While England shows an attitude of firmness and power towards the sister isle it is her duty to speak words of conciliation, peace, and even commiseration to the wronged and suffering people; and especially to spare no pains to readjust on an equitable basis the relations of landlord and tenant, and thus settle at once and for ever one of the principal and most bitter of Ireland's grievances.




The priests and prophets of the Old Testament Scriptures and the Apostles of Jesus Christ were set apart to minister in holy things. God said to Aaron and his sons, Ye shall serve: I have given your priest's office unto you as a service of gift, and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death' (Num. xviii. 7). “Son of man,' said the Lord to Ezekiel, I have made thee a watchman to the house of Israel: therefore, hear the word of my mouth and give them warning from me' (Ezekiel iii. 17). "I have set watchmen upon thy walls, 0 Jerusalem, who shall never hold their peace day nor night.' (Isa. lxii. 6). "As the Father hath sent Me, so send I you,' said Jesus to His disciples. (John xx. 21). “I certify you brethren,' said St. Paul, ó that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man, for I neither received of man, neither was I taught it, but the revelation of Jesus Christ' (Gal. i. 11). But the Apostles as such could have no successors, as their office was only temporary: hence, they set apart another class of men to minister in holy things. In the inspired epistles these are indifferently called “bishops,' presbyters,' and 'pastors.' What are their duties and prerogatives will now occupy our attention.

First, Ministerial Duties.-Duty is that which is due, or that which a person is bound by any obligation to do. The Christian minister is obligated

1. to preach the gospel plainly and fully. Jesus called the twelve disciples together and sent them to preach the kingdom of God. "Jesus commanded us to preach unto the people,' said Saint Peter in the house of Cornelius (Acts x. 42). And daily in the temple and in every house they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ (Acts v. 42). “For though I preach the gospel, said Saint Paul, “I have nothing to glory of, for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel (1 Corinthians ix. 16). The apostles understood their work, and did not fail to discharge it.

We preach Christ crucified. I had rather,' said St. Paul, speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue' (1 Corinthians xiv. 9). Christian ministers are called and set apart

« 上一頁繼續 »