THE IRISH QUESTION.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 2, Issue 257, 1 February 1881, Page 2

THE IRISH QUESTION.

To the Editor. Sir, — The interest which you manifest in the state of Ireland induces me to address you on this occasion. You fall into the error of most people who are either ignorant of the state of Ireland, or who allow their prejudices to eclipse their reason. In the first place, you assume that there is anarchy in Ireland. This is' noli ftfo* 1 case. You also assume that the / Land Leaguers and Home Rulers are relpbnsible for that anarchy. But I my bad state of Ireland is owing te the. had laws forced on it by bad ErigHahmen..«vd _ Scotchmen ; and on them must lie the responsibility. ' ' J f One hundred and twenty Bill's were, brought into the House of by Irish members with the view of improving the condition of Iriihmelt but?' they were obstructed out of the House by I. English and Scotch members—not ona of; > them was allowed to pass! Can you show any obstruction like that on the part I of the Irish members? If yon cannot, would you kindly “remote the beam?” This persistence in has ated the Irish people and they nave revolted against it. Then,/ Mr. Editor, condemn the makers of bad laws, and not their oppressed victims* rr.r, sYpniiM sympathy is entirely with the brutal savages who have for ages tortured the Irish people.: You never ,‘dcnmfnco the conduct of suph miscreants (as L >rd

Leitrim, and you forget to tell your readers that the lives and properties the peasants were never secure nipm the landlords, sapported by ‘Britishbayonets. Yoiishow plainly .the sensed feel towards Ireland by hoping that Irian-.*, men will be tried in London, or say in Glasgow, Where; thejrfwill 1 get .LHjfcrftoi G justice from their bitter enemies. Lord Granville said at Hanley that there are fewer outrages pn life in Ireland'than ito England. Compare the. statement wisk ' your article of the 27th inafa . Rhatfaabeo'// in one London paper particulars i of :ten; K murders or murderous outrages 5 but I am--not so influenced by prejudices to* pronounce, the ( whole English pejbjfle qpWafdly assassins,' nor to ask that the oriminaLi should be tried -in Duh Kn. ’-Tlhafe: notT yet seen your denunciation of the Lancashire rioters, nor have you;oried out'for* A any draconic legislation to crush them. In my humble opinion,. tha toDti ; ofypur articles is entirely out of place here.' Your paper is read and supported by .all-classes of the commoriity—one class, 1 'think, should not be made the object of your spleen or prejudice! Whatever be *lje failings of Irishmen, fidelity to those wfto treat them well is a marked feature in T their character. They have never, Judas-dike, sold for a sum of money any man to wliom owed allegiance. Can the same be said 'bf other people who are sp fond of denotsiCv‘’' ing them ? I have no desire to trespass fuijmer’ your space, but will ask you, in justice to—my very much calumniated. gOU?to»«|i£r to insert this for*— < ; * J^uunn. l -*-*- [)Ye have never condemned .tjie.»• Irish nation, nor could we ig|jors facfrl that a vast majority compare very favof- ** ably with their neighbors ; there .is a section—which we referred to in dur issue of the 27th inst,, and which, unfortunately, has its contemporary in every country—which allows the indulgence of‘the worst impulses to bring discredit upon ihe nation at large. As regards the respective extent of crime. in England. and Ireland, .the difference in population- would /of ootirfa have a material influence, but, in any case, the class of outrages we condemn are not of the ordinary criminal.charairter. We admit that the British Parliament has committed some errors in the government of Ireland, but we are sure pol Tear, J pendent, and every other well-regulated Irishman will recognise the inefficacy of the present form of agitation.— Ed., Guardian.] ■ - . ; ; ,_ ,] [/ ViV3