ART. VII.-LITERATURE OF THE LAND QUESTION IN IRELAND. and lic life. She is rapidly making compensa- | tan spoke and Lysaght sang. After that tion for the errors and negligences of centu- comes the forgotten eloquence of the Eman ries. And in her progress are to be found cipation time; and then over its fossil ani the germs of the political revival of the mosities spreads the literature of 1848, nations of central Europe. which may be regarded as a revival of that of 1782, modified by events, and con tributed to by both Catholics and Protes tants. This is the literature which has most influenced the rising generation, in so far as they have been influenced by any at all. It has been the parent of minor bards innumerable. It has superseded directly, or by its offspring of verse and prose, the popular chap-books which recounted the exploits of the "Rogues and Rapparees," and which had supplanted or taken a place beside the oral narrations concerning old Celtic heroes and the fantastic feats of Celtic demonology. The "Tales of the Western Highlands" had their counterparts in Ire land; and the peasant of the wild west coast of Donegal or Sligo would recite tales identical with them in almost every par ticular. Extremes sometimes meet. Tales of the Fenians are beginning to appear, to spread amongst the same people who in Gaedhlic called the historical romances of the ancient Celtic heroes the "Fenian Tales." For Finn MacCumhal was gene ralissimo of the Fenians in old time; his son, Ossian, was their poet-laureate; and his grandson, Oscar, was their champion without reproach. Future or foreign his torians night instance this renewed popu larity of the name of Fenian as an indication of a purely Celtic revival, if they were not told that the reappearance of the name is due simply to the fact that one of the prin cipal organizers of the republican brotherhood which bears it was a Celtic scholar, and adopted the name from Keating's Gaedhlic History of Ireland, which he was translating at the time of the foundation of the society. Besides the biographies, tales of adventure, and popular historical works in prose, there is a multitude of songs and ballads. They spring like an abundant harvest from a genial soil; and, as sheaf after sheaf is bound and sent out by the publishers, it is eagerly caught up and converted into mental food by the people. Poetry of passion, of sentiment, and of a tion, is here in its many phases. With love ditties, pastoral pieces, boat-songs, fairy-lays, historical chants, dirges, and merry catches, are mingled the exile's plaint and the battle slogan. It is customary with many persons to discuss the affairs and speculate on the fortunes of Ireland as though it were not a neighbouring island, but some country far removed from us by time or space. In this way much ingenuity has been displayed, and a considerable amount of erudition wasted. Untenable theories, artistically elaborated and eloquently proposed, have succeeded each other, till the Irish question is overlaid by several strata of them, to the great confusion of inquirers. It does not appear to have occurred to those who Occupy themselves with propounding these theories, that the Irish Sea is not wide, and that beyond it exists a nation which has both intelligence to perceive, and a voice to declare, its own requirements. Universities, colleges, and schools flourish there; a host of newspapers is spread over the land; books, pamphlets, and ballads leave no section of the population unrepresented. A serious examination of these sources of knowledge would remove the occasion of that bewilderment of mind which impedes the course of sound policy, and finds its expression now in lugubrious extravaganza and now in melodramatic prophecy. But the characteristic literature of Ireland is little known even to some influential classes in that country itself, and scarcely at all outside it, except amongst the scattered colonies of the Irish nation. It is emphatically the literature of the popular classes; and as such it reveals the wants and wishes of the Irish people, as distinguished on the one hand from the cravings of ascendancy, and on the other from the aspirations of the legion of lawyers. This literature has arisen like a sea, naturally, from its founts. Two separate currents, the colonial and the extra-colonial, combined to form it. Thus all its Jacobite songs are from the latter source, and were first composed in the Gaedhlic language; all its Williamite songs are the offspring of the English colony. The bond of union between the two elements, the betrothal gold, is the literature of 1782, when Grat character and in origin, search the earliest the Irish bard O'Gnive laments that the Gael cannot recognise in the altered country the old nurse of his youth, whilst that nurse doubts, on seeing him, "if that pale wretch be the child of her bosom." It appears again when the Celtic Muse, with hesitating lips, made its first essay in the English tongue. Last century, in the earliest specimens of devotional verse, complaint was made that the "noble gentry wantonly oppressed the poorer classes, "beggaring them with rents and rates." In the latest compilation published the charge is still the same. The street-ballad telling the tale of shipwreck and loss of the passengers' lives, says that "from racking tyrant landlords they quit their native land," with a hope of living more happily ale "among strangers far away." In the colonial portion of the literature similar complaints are found from before the time of James I. There is no other country that has so extensive a literature upon a theme so sad; none, probably, that has any considerable section of its letters devoted to such a theme at all. viewing the same matter; and this latter is the general mode adopted in Ireland. If the first description is to be accepted, there would be no reason to expect persistent discontent in Ireland: it would be an irrational anomaly. If the second is to be received, there would only be occasion to wonder if discontent were not strong and enduring. As there can be no doubt about the discontent, it is at least interesting to discover the cause alleged for its existence by those who feel it. None like the wearer can know where the shoe pinches. From the remoteness of its situation, Donegal maintained its Irish customs in their integrity until the flight of its Earl, O'Donel (Earl of Tyrconnell), towards the close of the year 1607. An anonymous letter, opportunely dropped or deposited in the council-chamber of Dublin, charging him and his neighbour, the Earl of Tyrone, with a conspiracy, broke their last hope of holding their possessions, for which the colonizing lords had manifested much hankering. They feared at last to lose both lives and land, and so fled. This anony But essentially the literature which has mous letter brought some half-million of grown up in Ireland around the land ques- acres theoretically to the Crown, but praction is one of prose rather than verse. tically (and soon formally) into the hands Disquisitions, essays, orations abound. The of the hankering lords and their friends. tenant-right advocates of Ulster, as of Mun- In Donegal there had been great encouragester, the Catholic priest, the Presbyterian ment given to Irish literature; the Annals clergyman, and the Episcopalian layman, of the Four Masters were compiled there. have all contributed to it. The landlord, It is a mountainous country, and was at the agent, and the Conservative advocate that time shaggy with woods. But the have also added their pamphlets and vol- soil of the valleys was fertile, and was umes; but, probably because they looked found to produce as well cereal crops as for a more sympathizing audience else hemp and flax; and in the fashioning of where than at home, they have generally the fibres of the latter into textile fabrics been careful to select an English rather the natives were well skilled. With rethan an Irish market for their wares. Re- spect to the tenure of the cultivators, Sir joinders and replies to them which appear John Davis, Attorney-General to James I., in Ireland (and it is there, with barely an rightly remarked that by the grants of exception, that they are published), are Elizabeth there was but one freeholder little heard of in Great Britain, or suffer made in a country, and that was the chief. under the rule which decrees the same des- The cultivators were overlooked; and yet tiny to the absent as to the non-existent. they were co-proprietors of the land. The But the circumstances of the time require chief had had but an uncertain tenure of that those who are not resolved to be mis- his chieftainship, for he might be deposed, led by a fragmentary literature should di- and could not bequeath it; but the clan verge from the beaten path to seek its com- had no uncertain tenure of their lands, from plement, so that whatever judgment they which no one could evict them. The terms may form at last may be formed after they of the Queen's grant did not matter much have heard both sides. in this instance. Externally the recipient might be a feudal lord and landholder: esoterically he was still a chief, with neither power nor desire to confiscate the lands of the clan. When, by his flight, the county of Donegal was divided amongst the planters, it was on a scheme approved by Sir John Davis. He had noted the errors of his predecessors; he had marked all the Let us try what can be done in a couple of prominent cases. Donegal and Kerry, counties at the extreme north-west and extreme south-west, have both been set before the British public by delineators who have sketched them from one point of view. The landlord and the agent have given their versions. But there is another mode of evils which had arisen from uncertainty of tenure; and it was expressly intended to avoid in this plantation the remissness which left the cultivator at the will of the lord. The oppression from which it behoved to guard him was of two kinds-AngloIrish and native Irish. Coigne and livery were of the first class. The great lords of the colony made war and peace at their will and pleasure; and they inflicted the expense on the cultivators, because no pay came from England, and for several reigns the standing entry in all the Pipe-rolls, between receipt and allowances, was "in Thesauro nihil." All was spent; but all did not suffice. So "the poore subject was mulcted for the expense of levies, both ordinary and extraordinary. This was tolerable until Maurice Fitzthomas of Desmond, chief commander of the army against the Scots in the reign of Edward II., began "that wicked extortion of coigne and livery and pay." Man's meat, horse's meat, and money, were taken from the cultivators at will, without ticket or return. Afterwards this became general. The idle soldiers of the worst disciplined army known "did eat up the people," destroyed their husbandry, and made them neglect agriculture, since they had no prospect but that a year's labour might be made away with in one night. The dispersed English colonies had to keep guards upon the borders and marches round about them; and these guards oppressed and impoverished at their will the poor English freeholder. "And because the great English lords and captains had power to impose this charge, when and where they pleased, manic of the poore freeholders were glad to give unto these lords a great part of their lands to hold the rest free from extortion; and manie others not being able to endure that intolerable oppression, did utterly quit their freeholds and return unto England." Some went to strange lands. The custom was denounced by Statute as damnable; and an ancient writer says that, although it was first invented in hell, yet if it had been practised there as in Ireland, it would have destroyed the very kingdom of Beelzebub. But, although the cultivators had thus to give up their land in part or altogether, the lord was ready besides to seize it by force; and whilst they grew poor he became rich. In this way, Fitzthomas of Desmond rose from a mean to a mighty estate, "insomuch that his ancient inherit ance being not one thousand markes yearely he became able to dispense every way ten thousand pounds per annum." The Sir John Davis severely denounces these Irish exactions. On the mind of any one not acquainted with the state of the law amongst the Irish at that time, his words would leave the impression that the chief could utterly ruin the cultivator by such means. And yet there are indications which show that he knew there were limiting lines. Those only who are versed in the native or Brehon laws, can understand the full import of his qualifying hints. He believes that the custom of coigne and livery was originally Irish, but candidly adds that when the English learned it, 'they used it with more insolency, and made it more intolerable, for their oppres sion was not temporary, or limited either to place or time." The Irish tax was limit ed, and was not so much imposed on the people as contributed by their consent, seeing that the Irish chief was only first amongst equals, and had no lordship over them but what they gave him. Indeed, Sir John Davis remarks complainingly that the chieftain had no estate in the land, that his son did not inherit his dignity. But he confesses that the chieftains had a portion of land allotted to them, even when he urges that their mode of support chiefly consisted in cuttings and cosherings, whereby they did spoil and impoverish the people at their pleasure." He was correct in his statements with respect to the chieftain's tenure of his chieftainship, and correct also in his statement that land was allotted to him, and that he had in addition a tribute in kind. But he was altogether wrong in saying that the elected chieftain could despoil the electing clansmen at his pleasure. An outsider might naturally be misled on hearing vaguely of tribute in kind; but this tribute was strictly defined and limited by the native laws, as were all other services and duties rendered whatso ever. Imperfectly informed of the rela tions existing between chief and tenant, Sir John Davis was not even aware that there were definite rents and different kinds of tenants. The food tribute was paid by one kind of tenant, whose farm had been stocked by his chief; and tenants who stocked their own farms paid differently. Service was rendered for service. If a band of reapers was contributed to reap the corn of the chieftain, and so forth, he, on the other hand, had to preserve the tribe-lands against inroads of enemies, to attend in councils, and to watch over the proper distribution of the proceeds of the reserved land, taking care that the sick got physicians, and the destitute or disabled food and shelter. What the English lords did was to claim service and contribution from their Irish tenants, and give nothing in return-just as they had imposed coigne and livery on English "poore earth-tillers and tenants, without anything doing or paying therefor." The words "Irish exactions," when used by Sir John Davis, must be understood in a sense consistent with these facts, not in the sense which his imperfect knowledge led him to assign to them, and which later commentators have adopted from him without even noticing the qualifying hints we have indicated. Against the state of the tenantry, as he saw it, his soul righteously revolted. He considered their condition worse than that of bond slaves, for "commonly the bond slave is fed by his lord, but here the lord was fed by his bond slave." To end, destroy, and for ever prevent the several kinds of evils described, the plantation scheme was formally drawn out. It was decreed that "the said undertakers shall not demise any part of their lands at will only, but shall make certain estates for years, for life, in tail or in fecsimple. No uncertain rent shall be reserved by the said undertakers, but the same shall be expressly set down, without reference to the custom of the country, and a proviso shall be inserted in their letterspatent against cuttings, cosheries, and other Irish exactions upon their tenants." How comes it then that similar exactions existed till quite lately, and probably still exist in Donegal; that it was left for a landlord of to-day to announce as a new thing, that he had given distinct farms (but not certain estates) to his tenants; and that tenancies-at-will, and uncertain rents, and intolerable exactions, are complained of now, as they were in the days of King James? Part of the fault is chargeable against the plantation scheme, which forbade the establishment of Irish tenants who were not conformable in religion, even on the lands of the servitors and natives, who alone were enabled to accept them as tenants. The English and Scottish undertakers, who were forbidden to alienate to meer Irish," did not, of course, give them any certain tenures, even when they allowed them to remain. They found them the " all the more profitable, exactly as the great holders who do not effect such results as | from the mountain commons, and allowed tenants-at-will. The fact that, in the penal to graze together there till spring. As the days, a higher rent was imposed by law on population increased, the evils of this sys a Catholic for the privilege of a lease, may tem of joint-occupancy became manifest, afford a means of comprehending other more especially as there was no longer any allegations, such as that tenants have not head of the clan, or judge, to settle the dis always been eager for leases-for leases, putes that arose. The holding of one tenthat is, which contained such or similar ant might be composed of patches of penal clauses. An ordinary, fair lease no ground scattered asunder, and intercepted tenant is more anxious for than the Irish, or by the lands of other tenants. Improvewould more willingly accept, as is manifest ments in agriculture made fences requisite. from the very enactment of that penal pro- In 1801, it was declared by the author of vision. the Donegal Survey that "all the farms lately let to tenants have been let to separate individuals; and the tenants themselves have found the vast benefits of sepa rate holdings and are themselves subdi viding (squaring) many of the old takes." This word "takes seems to be an attempt at rendering into English the term Gavelkind. In the Celtic it is Gavail-cine, which may be translated "takes of the tribe," or clan-colonization." The Irish tenants, it will be observed, were not averse to change when an alteration was proposed which would define their holdings. "All ranks are now clear of the advantages arising from separate tenures, and all are engaged in endeavouring to establish them," is the statement in the Survey. Mr. Henry Coulter, the author of a work on The West of Ireland, published in Dublin in 1862, relates that the lands of the largest proprietor in one county, who owned 176,000 acres, were all in rundale forty years previously. The agent got the tenants of a particular townland to appoint two arbitrators to value their holdings in it; then he divided it into districts equal in number to the number of tenants; these next drew lots to decide their future position; and when that was fixed each got there a farm equal in value to that of his previous lot. After some transitory objec tions, the agent was "besieged" with applications from the occupants of other townlands to have the new system applied to them also. When the " dividing" or "squaring" or "striping" has not been done in such a manner as to avoid all ap pearance of unfairness, serious complaints have naturally arisen. But here, as in other matters, it is generally a recent pur chaser, and rarely an old proprietor, be his origin or creed what it may, who is accused of inflicting the grievance. A descriptive tour, which was published in Belfast in 1858, by Mr. D. Holland, under the title of The Landlord in Donegal, and which rapidly reached a second edition, supplies some illustrative instances. In a book well known in its day, Lord George Hill, a Here then, in Donegal, there was a large number of Irish tenants left upon the land. They had not certain estates given them at certain rents. They were simply allowed to remain, to keep by their old ways amongst themselves; and the new landlords, who assumed the place of the expelled chieftain, got rent, and "Irish exactions," man-service and horse-service, but service in return gave them none. The chief had been checked by the Brehon and the priest; but the new landlord was judge in his own cause, and where he granted a lease required the tenant to do suit and service at the manor-court as well as grind his corn at the manor-mill. As a consequence of the tenants not having certain estates made for them, the clan system of co-tenancies remained, and still remains, although not now to any great extent. Under the Irish system it was held that the land belonged to the people, that the inhabitants of a district had equal rights to a property which belonged to all. The tenant had an occupation-right (which may have been the origin of the present Ulster "custom"), for he could sell his farm to another. On his death his land and chattels were divided equally amongst his children. Sir John Davis imagined that there was a re-adjustment of all the lands when a tenant died. Later writers describe the system under the name of "run-deal" and "rundale," and are misled by the simulative English of the name to conclude that the occupiers held confusedly in common. But it is clear that the term, as used in Ireland, is derived from two words (roinn'-diol) signifying "divided use," or separate share." Describing the rundale system as found existing in 1801, the author of one of the County Statistical Surveys made for the Dublin Society observed that "the cattle graze in common, but the crops are divided by a narrow margin of a foot broad left unploughed." Such margins may be seen in France at the present day. When the crops were taken off the cultivated ground in harvest, the cattle and sheep were brought 66 |