Ireland Since Parnell | Page 7

had refrained, with admirable restraint, from interference,
and they had done nothing to intensify the agonies of the moment. It
will always remain a matter for regret that they did not avail themselves
of a great opportunity, and their own unparalleled power with the
people, to mediate in the interests of peace--whilst their mediation
might still avail. But unfortunately, with one notable exception, they
united in staking the entire power of the Church on the dethronement of
Parnell. The effect was twofold. It added fresh fury to the attacks of
those who were howling for the head of their erstwhile chieftain and
who were glad to add the thunderbolts of the Church to their own
feebler weapons of assault; but the more permanent effect, and, indeed,
the more disastrous, was the doubt it left on the minds of thousands of
the best Irishmen whether there was not some malign plot in which the
Church was associated with the ban-dogs of the Liberal Party for
dishing Home Rule by overthrowing Parnell. It was recalled that the
Catholic priesthood, with a few glorious exceptions, stood apart from
Parnell when he was struggling to give life and force to the Irish
movement, and thus it came to pass that for many a bitter year the part
of the Irish priest in politics was freely criticised by Catholics whose
loyalty to the Church was indisputable.
Even still--if only the temporary withdrawal of Parnell were
secured--all might have been well. And it was to this end that the
Boulogne negotiations were set on foot. Mr William O'Brien has,
perhaps, left us the most complete record of what transpired in the
course of those fateful conversations. Parnell naturally desired to get
out of a delicate situation with all possible credit and honour, and his
magnificent services entitled him to the utmost consideration in this
respect. He insisted on demanding guarantees from Mr Gladstone on
Home Rule and the Land Question, and these given he expressed his
willingness to retire from the position of Chairman of the Party. At first

he insisted on Mr William O'Brien being his successor, but O'Brien
peremptorily dismissed this for reasons which were to him unalterable.
Mr Dillon was then agreed to, and a settlement was on the point of
achievement when a maladroit remark of this gentleman about the
administration of the Paris Funds so grievously wounded the pride of
Parnell that the serenity of the negotiations was irreparably disturbed,
and from that moment the movement for peace was merely an empty
show.
Chaos had come again upon the Irish Cause, and the Irish people, who
were so near the goal of success, wasted many years, that might have
been better spent, in futile and fratricidal strife, in which all the baser
passions of politics ran riot and played havoc with the finer purposes of
men engaged in a struggle for liberty and right.

CHAPTER III
THE DEATH OF A LEADER
There is no Irishman who can study the incidents leading up to Parnell's
downfall and the wretched controversies connected with it without
feelings of shame that such a needless sacrifice of greatness should
have been made.
Parnell broke off the Boulogne negotiations ostensibly on the ground
that the assurances of Mr Gladstone on the Home Rule Question were
not sufficient and that if he was to be "thrown to the English wolves,"
to use his own term, the Irish people were not getting their price in
return. But giving the best thought possible to all the available
materials it would seem that Mr Dillon's reflection on Parnell's bona
fides was really at the root of the ultimate break-away.
Mr Barry O'Brien, in his _Life of Parnell_, thus describes the incident:
"Parnell went to Calais and met Mr O'Brien and Mr Dillon. The Liberal
assurances were then submitted to him and he considered them

unsatisfactory; but this was not the only trouble. Mr O'Brien had looked
forward with hope to the meeting between Parnell and Mr Dillon. He
believed the meeting would make for peace. He was awfully
disappointed. Mr Dillon succeeded completely in getting Parnell's back
up, adding seriously to the difficulties of the situation. He seemed
specially to have offended Parnell by proposing that he (Mr Dillon)
should have the decisive voice in the distribution of the Paris Funds....
Mr Dillon proposed that the funds might be drawn without the
intervention of Parnell; that, in fact, Mr Dillon should take the place
Parnell had hitherto held.[1] Parnell scornfully brushed aside this
proposal and broke off relations with Mr Dillon altogether, though to
the end he remained on friendly terms with Mr O'Brien."
It is a vivid memory with me how closely we in Ireland hung upon the
varying fortunes and vicissitudes of the Boulogne pourparlers, and how
earnest was the