Johann Georg Eccarius  
Report on Karl Marx’s Speech on the Attitude of the  
British Government in the Irish Question  

in the General Council Meeting of November 16, 1869

Der Volksstaat.  
Nr. 21, 11. Dezember 1869

From England.

London, 29 November.

Karl Marx put forward two questions regarding Irish affairs:  
1) The position taken by the British government in the Irish affair;  
2) the position of the English workers towards the Irish.

In his opening speech he said: Political amnesty usually springs from two sources. 1) When a government has suppressed an insurrection and feels strong enough through force of arms and through the power of public opinion to despise the enemy; or when the enemy acknowledges his defeat and submits to the conditions, as in America. 2) When abuses have been engendered by bad government and the opposition triumphs, as in Austria and Hungary; in both cases amnesty follows. –  
During the election agitation, Gladstone and Bright justified the Fenian insurrection in their speeches. To put an end to the policy of conquest, Gladstone should have proclaimed an amnesty as soon as he came to the helm, as was done in America and Austria. The whole world expected an amnesty; he did nothing. Thereupon the municipalities in Ireland began to hold meetings in favour of the release of the prisoners. When a deputation was on the point of coming to London with a petition bearing 200,000 signatures, Gladstone set some prisoners free. The deputation came; he made evasions by pointing to the Queen, as if Victoria and not he had to command. Later, it was mentioned in Parliament that the prisoners were being treated hideously. The Home Secretary was forced to admit the facts, but an inquiry which the Irishman Moore demanded was refused. Only then did the popular amnesty movement begin. In August a meeting took place at Limerick, at which 30,000 persons were present; a memorial was adopted and sent off to the Minister. In all towns meetings were held, even in the north of Ireland, where the population is Protestant and has more attachment to the government – Gladstone remained silent. In Dublin a mass meeting was announced for October 10, the announcements had been making the rounds for weeks,

911

Johann Georg Eccarius

the Trades’ Unions (Gewerksgenossenschaften) intended to make a public procession through the city: when suddenly, late on October 8, a government placard appeared, which was posted up in a few side streets and prohibited processions through the main streets. The workers, who were not inclined to give the police an opportunity to beat their heads in, went to Isaac Butt, a barrister, who interpreted the placard as a general prohibition of processions. They went to the Lord Lieutenant to question him; he was not at home. His secretary could give no answer. They left a letter which the Lord Lieutenant was to answer in writing; he gave an evasive reply. The processions were abandoned, but nearly 200,000 people came together, who again adopted a memorial. On the following day it turned out that the soldiers had each been supplied with 40 rounds of live ammunition in order to be prepared for the processions. Now Gladstone found time to reply. However he replied not to the Dublin memorial, but – and even then only indirectly – to the Limerick memorial. He complains that the meetings had not used courteous language and had demanded as a right what could only be an act of grace.

A paid servant of the state presumes to prescribe to a public meeting how it should speak!

First of all he complains that the prisoners have not changed their opinions.

He therefore demands that they should morally degrade themselves, abjure their principles! Not even Napoleon and the King of Prussia demanded anything of the kind. Napoleon did not demand that the prisoners and exiles should renounce republicanism before he granted an amnesty.

Gladstone holds up to the people that an illustrious princess and an enlightened parliament have performed a great act of justice in abolishing the Irish Church. Does he then want the Irish to fall on their knees and worship him? The Irish state church was the badge of bondage – the badge has been effaced, but the bondage has remained. The abolition of the Irish state church was the only question through which Gladstone and Bright could get into the ministry; with this question Gladstone fettered the entire bourgeoisie standing outside the state church and at the same time gave the Irish place-hunters a plausible pretext to sell themselves to the ministry. The resolution which Karl Marx proposed upon Gladstone’s conduct will be communicated. ...

912