IRELAND. 



405 



without disturbance. This incident gave ori- 

 gin to the new verb "to boycott," which be- 

 came extensively current in the newspapers to 

 denote that kind of persecution which is car- 

 ried on through a conspiracy to deprive the 

 object of it of the privileges of intercourse and 

 trade with his fellow men. 



The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the 

 working of the Irish Land Act held its first 

 sitting at Dublin on the 1st of September. Its 

 purpose was to seek information through the 

 viva voce examination of witnesses, and by 

 procuring replies from competent persons, to 

 whom carefully prepared written questions 

 were addressed, as to whether rents had in- 

 creased since the Land Act of 1870 went into 

 operation; whether the compensations given 

 under that act had been fair and sufficient ; 

 whether the effect of the act had been to lead 

 to the making of improvements by the land- 

 lord or by the tenant ; and whether the ten- 

 ants had sought to borrow upon or mortgage 

 the conditional property in their farms ob- 

 tained under the act. Inquiries were also made 

 concerning the workings of the Ulster Custom, 

 and its adaptability to different parts of Ire- 

 land ; and with respect to the possibility of 

 reclaiming waste lands, and the best means of 

 furthering the creation of small owners in fee, 

 and, at the same time, preventing alienation or 

 subdividing. The leaders of the Land League 

 regarded the work of the Commission unfavor- 

 ably, and resolved not to recognize it. Their 

 action was not, however, acquiesced in by all 

 their followers. 



Mr. Parnell, addressing a meeting at Ennis, 

 September 19th, said that he believed that the 

 Commission was appointed in order to find out 

 for the English Government what was the least 

 measure of reform that had a chance of being 

 accepted in Ireland, and to divert the minds of 

 tenant-farmers from agitating and organizing. 

 He could not see what useful effect evidence 

 before the Committee could have, for its report, 

 if it made a report, must be of a one-sided 

 character, and against the interests of the peo- 

 ple of the country. The character of the Land 

 bill, to be sesured at the next session of Parlia- 

 ment, would depend largely on the attitude the 

 tenantry should maintain. The speaker ex- 

 horted his hearers to band themselves together 

 into Land Leagues; and, having suggested the 

 question what should be done with a tenant 

 who should bid for a farm from which another 

 had been evicted, he said that a more Christian 

 and charitable way than to shoot him would 

 be to shun him in every way, both in public 

 and private, u by putting him into a moral 

 Coventry, by isolating him from the rest of 

 the country, as if he were the leper of old." 

 No settlement of the land question, he said, 

 could be satisfactory or permanent which did 

 not insure the uprooting of the landlord sys- 

 tem. 



At the meeting of the League, of December 

 12th, Mr. Michael Davitt spoke in reference to 



the charges which had been brought against 

 the organization of causing law-breaking and 

 disorder, which he repelled. As to the real 

 facts, he said, four hundred and fifty demon- 

 strations had been held in Ireland since the 

 commencement of the movement, represent- 

 ing, on the supposition that each meeting was 

 attended by an average of five thousand per- 

 sons, an aggregate assemblage of more than 

 two million people. If the passions of that 

 number of people had been directly and sys- 

 tematically inflamed during the last two years, 

 there would have been a far heavier calendar 

 of crime and outrage than even the enemies of 

 the League could bring against it. Yet, not- 

 withstanding the famine and the serious crisis 

 through which the country had just passed, 

 it was found that during the last two years 

 only five homicides and a small number of at- 

 tacks upon individuals had occurred. A docu- 

 ment was adopted setting forth the objects of 

 the League, and the duties of branches. It 

 urged that no compromise be made with " land- 

 lordism," and that the proposals known as the 

 "three F's" (fixed tenure, fair rents, and free 

 sales) should be rejected, and deprecated acts 

 of violence, threatening letters, and the muti- 

 lation of cattle. 



The State prosecution of Mr. Parnell, and 

 thirteen of his leading associates in the Land 

 League, commenced in the Qneen's Bench Di- 

 vision, Dublin, on December 28th. Lord Chief 

 Justice May, at the opening of the proceed- 

 ings, intimated that he had resolved not to pre- 

 side at the trial. He stated that his remarks 

 on the occasion of the application for a post- 

 ponement of the trial had been misconstrued, 

 and that observations which he had made hy- 

 pothetically, were erroneously supposed to ex- 

 press his deliberate opinions on the charges 

 against the defendants. His connection with 

 the trial would be caviled at by those who 

 were unable or unwilling to comprehend any 

 explanation. He therefore left it to Mr. Jus- 

 tice Fitzgerald and Mr. Justice Barry to con- 

 duct the trial at bar. The jury, as ultimately 

 chosen to try the case, consisted of eight Cath- 

 olics, three Protestants, and ^one Quaker. On 

 January 5, 1881, Mr. Parnell, and the other 

 members of Parliament included in the indict- 

 ments, left Dublin for London to attend the 

 opening of Parliament. The trial terminated 

 on January 25th. The jury, after six and a 

 half hours' deliberation, were unable to agree 

 upon a verdict, and they were discharged. 

 One of the jurymen stated that ten were of 

 one way of thinking, and two of another. 



Additional troops were sent to the country 

 in December; and circulars were issued by 

 the Government to the constabulary, direct- 

 ing them to take immediate steps against per- 

 sons taking or being put in possession of prem- 

 ises from which they had been evicted, in- 

 forming them that they would be held respon- 

 sible for outrages committed against persons 

 lawfully occupying such premises, and warn- 



