You dont have javascript enabled! Please enable it! 1893.07.06 | Where are the angels? | THE HINDU Editorial - সংগ্রামের নোটবুক

“If the Irish always betray a disposition to quarrel with England, the only way to reconcile them is to concede to them some measure of real liberty and some degree of substantial choice in the disposition of their own domestic affairs”.

JULY 6, 1893
Where are the angels?

PARTY SPIRIT, IN SPITE OF THE EXCELLENT SERVICE IT IS ABLE to render to the cause of the public, ought not to be suffered to degenerate into absurd tomfoolery. Under its sway even statesmen become blind and give utterance to statements which are only calculated to provoke the risible susceptibilities of even the most average reader. Lord Salisbury on the 12th June, delivered a speech in South London on the Home Rule Bill and His Lordship in the course of his address invented what The Times terms the “Angelic Theory”, His Lordship, always cynical in his utterances, ridiculed the Irish as angels. “But seriously this question of the angelic nature of the Irish statesmen of the future” said the leader of the Conservative Party “is one that concerns you very much, because it is only upon that that these extraordinary proposals are defended.” And the obvious retort which these remarks suggest is, are the English angels? Is Lord Salisbury himself an angel? If not, why should the Irish people be denied what they claim because their statesmen in future could not be what no man on this earth can ever be. Lord Salisbury is a friend of coercion and an opponent of local self government in the wider sense of this term. Lord Salisbury concluded his observations on the angelic theory thus – “Now you will observe – I am anxious to bring you back to that point – that the matter we have to consider is the probability of the angelic theory – the probability that these men who have fought us for centuries – these men whose fathers when we were quarrelling with Spain took the side of Spain, when we were quarrelling with France took the side of France, when we were quarrelling with America took the side of America – that these men who have been brought up and nourished on hatred to England and who are in the hands of an organisation which certainly does not love England – that these men should be converted so suddenly from their ancient thought and belief that you can safely trust to them a position in Parliament which, if they misuse it, will enable them to wreck your institutions altogether.” But the historical facts on which the above condemnation is based can be as well availed of by the originators of the Home Rule Bill. If the Irish always betray a disposition to quarrel with England, the only way to reconcile them is to concede to them some measure of real liberty and some degree of substantial choice in the disposition of their own domestic affairs. If the English were the angels which the Irish, as Lord Salisbury told the world, are not, then Ireland would not have been annexed and treated for centuries in a manner discreditable to the history of England. Lord Salisbury while speaking on the angelic theory broached another which is more astounding. “Ever since the dawn of history” Lord Salisbury said, “there have been in all parts of the world, incessant conflicts, and in all those conflicts it was at all events safe to say with respect to one of the parties that their action was contrary to their own self-interest. Everywhere human beings have fought. They have been stimulated, not by a careful consideration of self-interest, but by anger, by pride, by misconception, by unreason; but they have fought. They have fought in all classes and through all ages. And why? Do we not constantly see in the newspapers some case in which a some case in which a wife has aggravated her husband, and the husband has broken the head of the wife? (Laughter). On grounds of pure self-interest that was exceedingly absurd. It never could have been the interest of the wife to aggravate her husband; it never could have been the interest of the husband to break the head of his wife; but yet these things have been and are, and you have had to make laws and to inflict punishment in view of that very unreasonable state of affairs. (Hear, hear). What is there to lead us to think that the Irish Government of the future, the Irish Government which will no doubt be driven by Archbishop Walsh (groans) and Mr. Timothy Healy (renewed groans) and other men like unto them, will be angelic, free from all the ordinary failings of humanity?” Why should the Irish alone be free from all the ordinary failings of humanity? Are the English, the French and the Americans above such failings? This standard of “above humanity” is to say the least a flimsy pretence for refusing to men the liberty to administer their own affairs. If men had not the failings of men, they will cease to be men. They may be angels or beasts and neither of these two stand in need of Governments and Bills to secure what they want. And then it is not all husbands and wives that delight in breaking each other’s head. And that a few foolish people do so, only proves the rule. The people who fight for their rights because they promote their self-interests are greater in number than those who fight pressed on by anger or pride. Lord Salisbury has certainly no faith in the success of human endeavour and in the progressive development of national powers. The speech of one of the pillars of the Conservative Party shows on what unreasonable and fragile basis Home Rule is opposed. When statesmen are driven to such makeshifts, Irish victory must be within measurable distance. With Mr. Gladstone as their great deliverer and the Liberal party carrying out clause after clause and standing together in close phalanx, Irishmen may hope to gratify their long cherished ambition, because they are not angels to suffer forever, and being ordinary mortals, they will not rest content till they exhaust all resources at their command to achieve that success which they have deserved by their long suffering and remarkable patience.

Reference:
The First 100
A Selection of Editorials, 1878-1978, THE HINDU, VOLUME I