THE GENTLE ART OF PROPAGANDA.

Southland Times, Issue 18844, 9 June 1920, Page 2

THE GENTLE ART OF PROPAGANDA.

To the Editor. -"dr, —And still another chapter of Irish ancient history from “lona,” and still there’s more to follow! Your timely, if brief, subleader may induce h.nn to try more recent events in his next. It is questionable, however, if these would suit his purpose as well. There is one sentence in the effusion of June 8 that is so entirely at variance with known facts that it calls for notice. It closes his penultimate par. “The Irish Catholic naturally disposed to live in peace and quiet with liia neighbour, knew well that the policy which turned Ireland into a shambles was lorged in London and did not proceed from the hatred of his Protestant neighbour.” Now we are quite sure that the latter part is true, and wish we were as certain that its opening words were equally veracious. Will “Iona” penult a little ancient history. On December 14 (1G41) a letter from Ireland was read in the British Parliament. It said, “All I can tell you is the miserable state we continue tinder, for the rebels dailyincrease in men and munitions in all parts, except in the province of Munster, exercising all manner of cruelties and striving who can be most barbarously exquisite in tormenting the poor Protestants, cutting off rheir ears, fingers and hands, plucking out their eyes, boiling the hands of little children before their mother.-;’ faces, stripping women naked, and ripping them up, etc.” During this rebellion Sir John Temple said that, “150,0(10 Protestants perished in two months, and 500,000 in two years.” Is it any wonder that Cromwell inade the brutal murderers pay an awful price V In this, as in the rebellion of 1708, the Priests of the Romish Church were the moving factors. Rut tho horrors of the I'/OS rebellion were, according to the Irish history from which I quote,'so horrible in their tiendish cruelty, that the record of them would soil your pages.

The bulk of “lona's” letter is taken up •vith trying to convince hi.s readers (hat rhe Protestants are as anxious for Home Tide for Ireland as the Romanists' Now, I deny that the intelligent Romanists, let alone the Protestants in Ireland, want Home Rule, ami in order to demonstrate the truth of this I invite 'dona” to an examination of more recent history. On June 17, 15 ! .)2, when the late Mr Gladstone's Home Rule Rill was immin.'ii l , a meat convention was held at Belfast of J 'j. delegates from ail the counties of Ulster, ruder the presidency of his Grace the Hake of Abercorn. Its purpose was to oppo-e Home Rule, and ihhuge convention was composed of Romanists and Prole.-tents alike. This, of course, will not .surprise us, being held in Belfast. But it is worthy of nolo - and I as!: "Iona” to give good heed To this—that a week later a still larger convention was held in Dublin, under the presidency of the Roman Gatholic Karl of j-ingal. who in his opening ,-peech said, "W’e loyal Catholics and Protestants, join liands with our loyal Protestant brethren in the North and say, wo will not have Home Rule. Because tile rights and privilege.-: of oi:r Protestant brethren in Ulster could not be conserved and would not be safe under any Home Rule Parliament. in Dublin.” TbC justifies the statement 1 made, for ware, it not for too shocking terrori.-m prints ;T by the rebel leaders, a. large part of the p° • uialam of Ireland would oppose ijonis Rme, knowing that it* would j.lun-'e liu-m into 'bankruptcy or an intolerable tattmion that, would only slave i,a the intimate rani af ih.ir country.— 1 am, t c.. VKRITAS. June 8. (Our correspondent, too. quotes the past : S a icply to the pr.a-ent. The Bari of Kin ralV dean- emne amUr llicit heading and Co noi j.; plv to the prewni scheme, which picaw Ulster a separate parliament. The . otiiur at elect •>;!! 4 in Ireland, in periods when 1 here was no terrorism, is a compute •w !\- to toe simae-i i"t, that ilm deni.vd for 1 ln:r>* tUde in Rebind is exaggerated.—