Jenny Marx on Ireland 


Article I
            February 27, 1870 
            Article V
            March 22, 1870 Article II
            March 5, 1870 
            Article VI
            April 2, 1870 Article III
            March 16, 1870 
            Article VII
            April 17, 1870 Article IV
            March 18, 1870 
            Article VIII
            April 19, 1870 



Written under the pseudonym J. Williams for the French newspaper La 
Marseillaise. The third article was co-written by Jenny Marx and her father. 
These articles generated considerable public response. 
Online Version: The fifth article was quoted in The Irishman No. 40 (April 20, 
1870) and the sixth was reprinted in full in an English translation in No. 45 
(May 7, 1870). They were first fully translated into English by Progress 
Publishers in 1970. Transcribed for the Internet Jan 18 1996, by Zodiac. Present 
html markup by Brian Basgen in 1999. 




I



La Marseillaise, No. 71
March 1, 1870
London, February 27, 1870 


The Marseillaise for February 18 quotes an article from The Daily News, in which 
the English paper gives information to the French press concerning the election 
of O'Donovan Rossa. Since this information is somewhat confused and since 
partial explanations only serve to throw a false light on the things which they 
are claiming to elucidate, I should be grateful if you would kindly publish my 
comments on the article in question. 
Firstly, The Daily News states that O'Donovan was sentenced by a jury, but it 
omits to add that in Ireland the juries are composed of minions more or less 
directly nominated by the government. 
Then, in speaking with righteous horror of the treason-felony, the false 
liberals of The Daily News omit to say that this new category in the English 
Penal Code was expressly invented to identify the Irish patriots with the vilest 
of criminals. 
Let us take then the case of O'Donovan Rossa. He was one of the editors of The 
Irish People. Like most of the Fenians he was sentenced for having written 
so-called seditious articles. Consequently the Marseillaise was not wrong in 
drawing an analogy between Rochefort and Rossa."' 
Why does The Daily News, which aims at keeping France informed about the Fenian 
prisoners, remain silent about the appalling treatment of them? I trust that you 
will allow me to make up for this prudent silence. 
Some time ago O'Donovan was put in a dark cell with his hands chained behind his 
back. His handcuffs were not removed night or day so that he was forced to 
crouch on the ground to lick his food, gruel made with water. Mr. Pigott, editor 
of The Irishman, learnt about these facts from Rossa who described them to him 
in the presence of the prison governor and another witness, and published the 
information in his newspaper, encouraging Mr. Moore, one of the Irish members of 
the House of Commons, to request a parliamentary enquiry into what goes on in 
the prisons. The government strongly opposed this request. Thus, Moore's motion 
was rejected by 171 votes to 36 -- a worthy supplement to the voting which 
crushed the right to suffrage. 
And this took place during the ministry of the sanctimonious Gladstone. As 
you-can see the great Liberal leader knows how to mock humanity and justice. 
There are also judases who do not wear glasses. 
Here is another case which also does England credit. O'Leary, a Fenian prisoner 
aged between sixty and seventy, was put on bread and water for three weeks 
because -- the reader of the Marseillaise would never guess why -- because Leary 
called himself a "pagan" and refused to say he was Protestant, Presbyterian, 
Catholic or Quaker. He was given the choice of one of these religions or bread 
and water. Of these five evils, O'Leary, or "pagan O'Leary" as he is called, 
chose the one that he considered the least-bread and water. 
A few days ago after examining the body of a Fenian who died at Spike Island 
Prison the CORONER expressed his very strong disapproval of the manner in which 
the deceased man had been treated. 
Last Saturday a young Irishman called Gunner Hood left prison after four years 
in it. At the age of 19 he had joined the English army and served England in 
Canada. He was taken before a military tribunal in 1866 for having written 
seditious articles and sentenced to two years' hard labour. When the sentence 
was pronounced Hood took his cap and threw it into the air shouting, "Long live 
the Irish republic!" This impassioned cry cost him dear. He was sentenced to an 
extra two years in prison and fifty strokes for good measure. This was carried 
out in the most atrocious manner. Hood was attached to a plough and two 
strapping blacksmiths were armed With cat-o-nine-tails. There is no equivalent 
term in French for the English knout. Only the Russians and the English know 
what is meant by this. Like draws to like. 
Mr. Carey, a journalist, is kept at present in the part of the prison intended 
for the insane, the silence and the other forms of torture to which he has been 
subjected having turned him into a mass of living flesh deprived of all reason. 
The Fenian Colonel Burke, a man who has distinguished himself not only by his 
military service in the American army but also as a writer and painter, has also 
been reduced to a pitiful state in which he can no longer recognise his closest 
relatives. I could add many more names to this list of Irish martyrs. Suffice it 
to say that since 1866, when there was a raid on The Irish People's offices, 20 
Fenians have died or gone mad in the prisons of humanitarian England. 
J. Williams





II



La Marseillaise, No. 79
March 9 1870
London, March 5 
During the meeting of the House of Commons on March 3 Mr. Stacpoole questioned 
Mr. Gladstone on the treatment of Fenian prisoners. He said, among other things, 
that Dr. Lyons of Dublin had recently stated that 
"the discipline, diet, personal restrictions and the other punishments were 
bound to cause permanent damage to the prisoners' health." 
After having expressed complete satisfaction with the way in which prisoners 
were treated, Mr. Gladstone crowned his little speech with this brilliantly 
witty remark: 
"As to the health of O'Donovan Rossa, I am glad to be able to say that during 
her last visit to her husband Mrs. O'Donovan Rossa congratulated him on looking 
better." 
Whereupon a burst of Homeric laughter broke out from all sides of that noble 
assembly. Her last visit! Note that Mrs. O'Donovan Rossa had not only been 
separated from her husband for several years, but that she had travelled all 
over America earning money to feed her children by giving public lectures on 
English literature. 
And bear in mind also that this same Mr. Gladstone, whose quips Care so pointed, 
is the almost sacred author of Prayers, the Propagation of the Gospel, The 
Functions of Laymen in the Church and the recently published homily Ecce homo. 
Is the profound satisfaction of the head jailer shared by his prisoners? Read 
the following extracts from a letter written by O'Donovan Rossa, which by some 
miracle was. slipped out of the prison and arrived at its destination after an 
incredible delay: 



Letter from Rossa 
I have already told you about the hypocrisy of these English masters who, after 
placing me in a position which forced me to get down on my knees and elbows to 
eat, are now depriving me of food and light and giving me chains and a Bible. I 
am not complaining of the penalties which my masters inflict on me -- it is my 
job to suffer -- but I insist that I have the right to inform the world of the 
treatment to which I am subjected, and that it is illegal to hold back my 
letters describing this treatment. The minute precautions taken by the prison 
authorities to prevent me writing letters are as disgusting as they are absurd. 
The most insulting method was to strip me once a day for several months and then 
examine my arms, legs and all other parts of my body. This took place at 
Millbank daily from February to May 1867. One day I refused, whereupon five 
prison officers arrived, beat me mercilessly and tore off my clothes. 
Once I succeeded in getting a letter to the outside, for which I was rewarded by 
a visit from Messrs. Knox and Pollock, two police magistrates.' 
How ironical to send two government employees to find out the truth about the 
English prisons. These gentlemen refused to take note of anything important 
which I had to tell them. When I touched upon a subject which was not to their 
liking, they stopped me by saying that prison discipline was not their concern. 
Isn't that so, Messrs. Pollock and Knox? When I told you that I had been forced 
to wash in water which had already been used by half a dozen English prisoners, 
did you not refuse to note my complaint? 
At Chatham I was given a certain amount of tow to pull out and told that I would 
go without food if I did not finish the work by a certain time. 
"Perhaps you'll still punish me even if I do the job in time," I shouted. 
"That's what happened to me at Millbank." 
"How could it?" asked the jailer. 
Then I told him that on July 4 I had finished my work ten minutes before the 
appointed time and picked up a book. The officer saw me do this, accused me of 
being lazy and I was put on bread and water and locked in a dark cell for 
forty-eight hours. 
One day I caught sight of my friend Edward Duffy. He was extremely pale. A 
little later I heard that Duffy was seriously ill and that he had expressed the 
wish to see me (we had been very close in Ireland). I begged the governor to 
give me permission to visit him. He refused point-blank. This was round about 
Christmas '67 -- and a few weeks later a prisoner whispered to me through the 
bars of my cell: "Duffy is dead." 
How movingly this would have been described by the English if it had happened in 
Russia! 
If Mr. Gladstone had been present on such a sad occasion in Naples, what a 
touching picture he would have painted! Ah! Sweet Pharisees, trading in 
hypocrisy, with the Bible on their lips and the devil in their bellies. 
I must say a word in memory of John Lynch. In March 1866 I found myself together 
with him in the exercise yard. We were being watched so closely that he only 
managed to say to me, "The cold is killing me." But then what did the English do 
to us? They took us to London on Christmas Eve. When we arrived at the prison 
they took away our flannels and left us shivering in our cells for several 
months. Yes, they cannot deny that it was they who killed John Lynch. But 
nevertheless they managed to produce officials at the enquiry who were ready to 
prove that Lynch and Duffy had been given very gentle treatment. 
The lies of our English oppressors exceed one's wildest imagination. 
If I am to die in prison I entreat my family and my friends not to believe a 
word of what these people say. Let me not be suspected of personal rancour 
against those who persecuted me with their lies. I accuse only tyranny which 
makes the use of such methods necessary. 
Many a time the circumstances have reminded me of Machiavelli's words: "that 
tyrants have a special interest in circulating the Bible so that the people 
understand its precepts and offer no resistance to being robbed by brigands". 
So long as an enslaved people follows the sermons on morality and obedience 
preached to them by the priests, the tyrants have nothing to fear. 
If this letter reaches my fellow countrymen I have the right to demand that they 
raise their voices to insist that justice be done for their suffering brothers. 
Let these words whip up the blood that is moving sluggishly in their veins! 
I was harnessed to a cart with a rope tied round my neck. This knot was fastened 
to a long shaft and two English prisoners received orders to prevent the cart 
from bouncing. But they refrained from doing this, the shaft rose up into the 
air and the knot came undone. If it had tightened I would be dead. 
I insist that they do not possess the right to put me in a situation where my 
life depends on the acts of other people. 
A ray of light is penetrating through the bolts and bars of my prison. This is 
reminder of the day in Newtownwards where I met Orangemen and Ribbonmen who had 
forgotten their bigotry! 
O'Donovan Rossa 
Political prisoner sentenced 
to hard labour 
"O'Donovan Rossa. Letter from the Member for Tipperary", 
The Irishman, No. 32, February 5, 1870. 





III



La Marseillaise, No. 89 
March 19 1870 
London, March 16, 1870 
The main event of the past week has been O'Donovan Rossa's letter which I 
communicated to you in my last report. 
The Times' printed the letter without comment, whereas The Daily News published 
a commentary without the letter. 
"As one might have expected," it says, "Mr. O'Donovan Rossa takes as his subject 
the prison rules to which he has been subjected for a while. 
How atrocious this "for a while" is in speaking of a man who has already been 
imprisoned for five years and condemned to hard labour for life! 
Mr. O'Donovan Rossa complains among other things -- "of being harnessed to a 
cart with a rope tied round his neck" in such a way that his life depended on 
the movements of English convicts, his fellow prisoners. 
But, exclaims The Daily News, "Is it really unjust to put a man in a situation 
where his life depends on the acts of others? When a person is in a car or on a 
steamer does not his life also depend on the acts of others?" 
After this brilliant piece of arguing, the pious casuist reproaches O'Donovan 
Rossa for not loving the Bible and preferring the Irish people, an opposition 
which is sure to delight its readers. 
"Mr. O'Donovan," it continues, "seems to imagine that prisoners serving 
sentences for seditious writing should be supplied with cigars and daily 
newspapers, and that they should above all have the right to correspond freely 
with their friends." 
Ho, ho, virtuous Pharisee! At last you have admitted that O'Donovan Rossa has 
been sentenced to hard labour for life for seditious writing and not for an 
attempted assassination of Queen Victoria, as you vilely insinuated in your 
first address to the French press. 
"After all," this shameless newspaper concludes, "O'Donovan Rossa is simply 
being treated for what he is, that is, an ordinary convict." 
After Mr. Gladstone's special newspaper, here is a different angle from the 
"liberal" press, The Daily Telegraph, which generally adopts a rougher manner. 
"If we condescend," it says, "to take note of O'Donovan Rossa's letter, it is 
not because of the Fenians who are incorrigible, but exclusively for the 
well-being of France. 
"Let it be known," it says, "that only a few days ago in the House of Commons 
Mr. Gladstone made a formal denunciation of all these outrageous lies, and there 
cannot be any intelligent Frenchmen of whatever party and class who would dare 
doubt the word of an English gentleman." 
But if, contrary to expectation, there were parties or people in France perverse 
enough not to believe the word of an English gentleman such as Mr. Gladstone, 
France could not at least resist the well-meant advice of Mr. Levy who is not a 
gentleman and who addresses you in the following terms: 
"We advise our neighbours, the Parisians, to treat all the stories of cruelties 
committed on political prisoners in England as so many insolent lies." 
With Mr. Levy's permission, I will give you a new example of the value of the 
words of the gentlemen who make up Gladstone's Cabinet. 
You will remember that in my first letter I mentioned Colonel Richard Burke, a 
Fenian prisoner who has gone insane thanks to the humanitarian methods of the 
English government. The Irishman was the first to publish this news, after which 
Mr. Underwood sent a letter to Mr. Bruce, the Home Secretary, asking him for an 
enquiry into the treatment of political prisoners. 
Mr. Bruce replied in a letter which was published in the English press and which 
contained the following sentence: 
"With regard to Richard Burke at Woking Prison, Mr. Bruce is bound to refuse to 
make an enquiry on the grounds of such ill-founded and extravagant insinuations 
as those contained in the extracts from The Irishman which you have sent me." 
This statement by Mr. Bruce is dated January 11, 1870. Now in one of its recent 
issues The Irishman has published the same Minister's reply to a letter from 
Mrs. Barry, Richard Burke's sister, who asked for news, about her brother's 
"alarming" condition. The ministerial reply of February 24 contains an official 
report dated January 11 in which the prison doctor and Burke's special guard 
state that he had become insane. Thus, the very day when Mr. Bruce publicly 
declared the information published by The Irishman to be false and ill-founded, 
he was concealing the irrefutable official proof in his pocket! It should be 
mentioned incidentally that Mr. Moore, an Irish member in the House of Commons, 
is to question the Minister on the treatment of Colonel Burke. 
The Echo, a recently founded newspaper, takes an even stronger liberal line than 
its companions. It has its own principle which consists of selling for one 
penny, whereas all the other newspapers cost twopence, fourpence or sixpence. 
This price of one penny forces it on the one hand to make pseudo-democratic 
professions of faith so as not to lose its proletarian subscribers, and on the 
other hand to make constant reservations in order to win over respectable 
subscribers from its competitors. 
In its long tirade on O'Donovan Rossa's letter it finished up by saying that 
"perhaps even those Fenians who have received an amnesty will refuse to believe 
the exaggerations of their compatriots", as if Mr. Kickham, Mr. Costello and 
others had not already published information on their suffering in prison 
totally in accordance with Rossa's letter! But after all its subterfuge and 
senseless evasions The Echo touches on the sore point. 
The "publications by the Marseillaise," it says, "will cause a scandal and this 
scandal will spread all round the world. The continental mind is perhaps too 
limited to be able to discern the difference between the crimes of a Bomba and 
the severity of a Gladstone! So it would be better to hold an enquiry", and so 
on. 
The Spectator, a "liberal" weekly which supports Gladstone, is governed by the 
principle that all genres are bad except the boring one. This is why it is 
called in London the journal of the seven wise men. After giving a brief account 
of O'Donovan Rossa and scolding him for his aversion to the Bible, the journal 
of the seven wise men pronounces the following judgment: 
"The Fenian O'Donovan Rossa does not appear to have suffered anything more than 
the ordinary sufferings of convicts, but we confess that we should like to see 
changes in this regime. It is very right and often most advisable to shoot 
rebels. It is also right to deprive them of their liberty as the most dangerous 
type of criminals. But it is neither right nor wise to degrade them." 
Well said, Solomon the Wise! 
Finally we have The Standard, the main organ of the Tory party, the 
Conservatives. You will be aware that the English oligarchy is composed of two 
factions: the landed aristocracy and the plutocracy. If in their family quarrels 
one takes the side of the plutocrats against the aristocrats one is called a 
liberal or even radical. If, on the contrary, one sides with the aristocrats 
against the plutocrats one is called a Tory. 
The Standard calls O'Donovan Rossa's letter an apocryphal story probably written 
by A. Dumas. 
"Why," it says, "did the Marseillaise refrain from adding that Mr. Gladstone, 
the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Lord Mayor were present each morning while 
O'Donovan Rossa was being tortured?" 
In the House of Commons a certain member once referred to the Tory party as the 
"stupid party". Is it not a fact that The Standard well deserves its title as 
the main organ of the stupid party! 
Before closing I must warn the French not to confuse the newspaper clamour with 
the voice of the English proletariat which, unfortunately for the two countries, 
Ireland and England, has no echo in the English press. 
Let it suffice to say that more than 200,000 men, women and children of the 
English working class raised their voices in Hyde Park to demand freedom for 
their Irish brothers, and that the General Council of the International Working 
Men's Association, which has its headquarters in London and includes well-known 
English working-class leaders among its members, has severely condemned the 
treatment of Fenian prisoners and come out in defence of the rights of the Irish 
people against the English government."' 
P.S. As a result of the publicity given by the Marseillaise to O'Donovan Rossa's 
letter, Gladstone is afraid that he may be forced by public opinion to hold a 
parliamentary public enquiry into the treatment of political prisoners. In order 
to avoid this again (we know how many times his corrupt conscience has opposed 
it already) this diplomat has just produced, an official, but anonymous denial 
of the facts quoted by Rossa. 
Let it be known in France that this denial is nothing more than a copy of the 
statements made by the prison jailer, police magistrates Knox and Pollock, etc., 
etc. These gentlemen know full well that Rossa cannot reply to them. He will be 
kept under stricter supervision than ever, but ... I shall reply to them in my 
next letter with facts, the verification of which does not depend on the 
goodwill of jailers. 
J. Williams





IV



La Marseillaise, No. 91 
March 21 1870 
London, March 18, 1870 
As I announced in my last letter Mr. Moore, an Irish member of the House of 
Commons, yesterday questioned the government on the treatment of Fenian 
prisoners. He referred to the request about Richard Burke and four other 
prisoners held in Mountjoy Prison (in Dublin) and asked the government whether 
it considered it honourable to hold the bodies of these men after having 
deprived them of their senses. Finally, he insisted on a "full, free and public 
enquiry". 
So here was Mr. Gladstone with his back to the wall. In 1868 he gave an 
insolent, categorical refusal to a request to hold an enquiry made by the same 
Mr. Moore. Since then he has always replied in the same fashion to repeated 
demands for an enquiry. 
Why give way now? Should he admit to being alarmed by the clamour on the other 
side of the Channel? Never. As to the charges levelled against our governors of 
prisons, we have asked them to give a full explanation in this connection. 
The latter have unanimously replied that all this is sheer nonsense. Thus, our 
ministerial conscience is naturally satisfied. But after the explanations given 
by Mr. Moore -- these are his exact words -- it appears "that the point in 
question is not exactly satisfaction. That the satisfaction of the minds of the 
government derives from its confidence in its subordinates and, 'therefore', 
would be both politic and just to conduct an enquiry into the truth of the 
jailers' statements". 
One day he says this, and the next day says that, 
His yesterday's views today he will shelve, 
He now wears a helmet, and now a top hat, 
A nuisance to others, a bore to himself. 
But if he does give way in the end, he does so with a further mental 
reservation. 
Mr. Moore demands a "full, free and public enquiry". Mr. Gladstone replies that 
he is responsible for the "form" of the enquiry, and we already know that this 
will not be a "parliamentary enquiry", but one conducted by means of a Royal 
Commission. In other words, the judges in this great trial, in which Mr. 
Gladstone appears as the main defendant, are to be selected and appointed by Mr. 
Gladstone himself. 
As for Richard Burke, Mr. Gladstone states that the government had learnt of his 
insanity as early as January 9. Consequently, his honourable colleague Mr. 
Bruce, the Home Secretary, lied outrageously by declaring in his open letter of 
January 11 that this information was untrue. But, Mr. Gladstone continues, Mr. 
Burke's mental disturbance had not reached a sufficiently advanced stage to 
justify his release from prison. It must not be forgotten that this man was an 
accessory to the blowing up of Clerkenwell Prison. Really? But Richard Burke was 
already detained in Clerkenwell Prison when a number of other people took it 
into their heads to blow up the prison in order to free him. Thus he was an 
accessory to this ridiculous attempt which, it is thought, was instigated by the 
English police and which, if it had succeeded, would have buried him under the 
ruins! Moreover, concludes Mr. Gladstone, we have already released two Fenians 
who went mad in our English prisons. But, interrupts Mr. Moore, I was talking 
about the four insane men detained in Mountjoy Prison in Dublin. Be that as it 
may, replies Mr. Gladstone. There are still two madmen less in our prisons. 
Why is Mr. Gladstone so anxious to avoid all mention of Mountjoy Prison? We 
shall see in a moment. This time the facts are verified not by letters from the 
prisoners, but in a Blue Book published in 1868 by order of Parliament. 
After the Fenian skirmish ... the English government declared a state of general 
emergency in Ireland. All guarantees of the freedom of the individual were 
suspended. Any person "suspected of being suspected of Fenianism" could thus be 
thrown into prison and kept there without being brought to court as long as it 
pleased the authorities. One of the prisons full of suspects was Mountjoy 
Convict Prison in Dublin, of which John Murray was the inspector and Mr. 
M'Donnell the doctor. Now what do we read in the Blue Book published in 1868 by 
order of Parliament? 
For several months Mr. M'Donnell wrote first to Inspector Murray protesting 
against the cruel treatment of suspects. Since the inspector did not reply, Mr. 
M'Donnell sent three or four reports to the prison governor. In one of these 
letters he refers to 
"certain persons", -- I am citing word for word -- "who show unmistakable signs 
of insanity". He goes on to add: "I have not the slightest doubt that this 
insanity is the consequence of the prison regime. Quite apart from all humane 
considerations, it would be a serious matter if one of these prisoners, who have 
not been sentenced by a court of law but are merely suspects, should commit 
suicide." 
All these letters addressed by Mr. M'Donnell to the governor were intercepted by 
John Murray. Finally, Mr. M'Donnell wrote direct to Lord Mayo, the First 
Secretary for Ireland. He told him for example: 
"There is no one, my Lord, as well informed as you yourself are on the harsh 
discipline to which the 'suspect' prisoners have been subjected for a 
considerable time, a more severe form of solitary confinement than that imposed 
on the convicts." 
What was the result of these revelations published by order of Parliament? The 
doctor, Mr. M'Donnell, was dismissed!!! Murray kept his post. 
All this took place during the Tory ministry. When Mr. Gladstone finally 
succeeded in unseating Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli by fiery speeches in which he 
denounced the English government as the true cause of Fenianism, he not only 
confirmed the savage Murray in his functions but also, as a sign of his special 
satisfaction, conferred a large sinecure, that of "Registrar of habitual 
criminals", on his post of inspector. 
In my last letter I stated that the anonymous reply to Rossa's letter, 
circulated by the London newspapers, emanated directly from the Home Office. 
It is now known to be the work of the Home Secretary, Mr. Bruce. Here is a 
sample of his "ministerial conscience!" 
As to Rossa's complaint that he is obliged "to wash in water which has already 
been used for the convicts' ablutions, the police magistrates Knox and Pollock 
have declared that after their careful enquiry it would be superfluous to 
consider such nonsense", says Mr. Bruce. 
Luckily the report by police magistrates Knox and Pollock has been published by 
order of Parliament. What do they say on page 23 of their report? That in 
accordance with the prison regime a certain number of convicts use the same bath 
one after the other and, that "the guard cannot give priority to O'Donovan Rossa 
without offending the others". It would, therefore, be "superfluous to consider 
such nonsense". 
Thus, according to the report by Knox and Pollock, it is not O'Donovan Rossa's 
allegation that he was forced to bathe in water which had been used by convicts 
that is nonsense, as Mr. Bruce would have them say. On the contrary, these 
gentlemen find it absurd that O'Donovan Rossa should have complained about such 
a disgrace. 
During the same meeting in the House of Commons at which Mr. Gladstone declared 
himself ready to hold an enquiry into the treatment of Fenian prisoners, he 
introduced a new Coercion Bill for Ireland, that is to say, the suppression of 
constitutional freedoms and the proclamation of a state of emergency. 
Theoretical fiction has it that constitutional liberty is the rule and its 
suspension an exception, but the whole history of English rule in Ireland shows 
that a state of emergency is the rule and that the application of the 
constitution is the exception. Gladstone is making agrarian crimes the pretext 
for putting Ireland once more in a state of siege. His true motive is the desire 
to suppress the independent newspapers in Dublin. From henceforth the life or 
death of any Irish newspaper will depend on the goodwill of Mr. Gladstone. 
Moreover, this Coercion Bill is a necessary complement to the Land Bill recently 
introduced by Mr. Gladstone which consolidates landlordism in Ireland whilst 
appearing to come to the aid of the tenant farmers. It should suffice to say of 
this law that it bears the mark of Lord Dufferin, a member of the Cabinet and a 
large Irish landowner. It was only last year that this Dr. Sangrado published a 
large tome to prove that the Irish population has not yet been sufficiently 
bled, and that it should be reduced by a third if Ireland is to accomplish its 
glorious mission to produce the highest possible rents for its landlords and the 
largest possible quantities of meat and wool for the English market. 
J. Williams





V



La Marseillaise, No. 99 
March 29 1870 
London, March 22 
There is a London weekly with a wide circulation among the people which is 
called Reynolds's Newspaper. This is what it has to say about the Irish 
question: 
"Now we are regarded by the other nations as the most hypocritical people on 
earth. We blew our own trumpets so loudly and so joyfully and exaggerated the 
excellence of our institutions so much, that now when our lies are being exposed 
one by one it is not at all surprising that other peoples should ridicule us and 
ask themselves whether it can be possible. It is not the people of England who 
have brought about such a state of affairs, because the people also have been 
tricked and deceived -- the blame lies with the ruling classes and a venal, 
parasitic press ...... . 
The Coercion Bill for Ireland which was introduced on Thursday evening is a 
detestable, abominable, execrable measure. This Bill extinguishes the last spark 
of national liberty in Ireland and silences the press of this unhappy country in 
order to prevent its newspapers from protesting against a policy which is the 
crying disgrace of our time. The government wants its revenge on all those 
newspapers which did not greet its wretched Land Bill with transports of 
delight, and will get it. In effect the Habeas Corpus Act will be suspended, 
because from now onwards it will be possible to imprison for six months or even 
for life any person who cannot explain his behaviour to the satisfaction of the 
authorities. 
Ireland has been put at the mercy of a band of well-trained spies who are 
euphemistically referred to as "detectives". 
Not even Nicholas of Russia ever published a crueller ukase against the 
unfortunate Poles than this Bill of Mr. Gladstone's against the Irish. It is a 
measure which would have won Mr. Gladstone the good favour of the famous King of 
Dahomey. Nevertheless, Mr. Gladstone had the colossal effrontery to boast in 
front of Parliament and the nation of the generous policy which his government 
is proposing to adopt with regard to Ireland. At the end of his speech on 
Thursday Gladstone even went as far as producing expressions of regret 
pronounced with a sanctimonious, lachrymose solemnity worthy of the reverend Mr. 
Stiggins. But snivel as he may, the Irish people will not be deceived. 
We repeat that the Bill is a shameful measure, a measure worthy of Castlereagh, 
a measure which will invoke the condemnation of all free nations on the heads of 
those who invented it and those who sanction and approve it. Finally, it is a 
measure which will bring well-deserved opprobrium to Mr. Gladstone and, we 
sincerely hope, lead to his swift defeat. And how has the demagogic minister Mr. 
Bright been able to keep silent for forty-eight hours? 
We state without hesitation that Mr. Gladstone has proved to be the most savage 
enemy and the most implacable master to have crushed Ireland since the days of 
the notorious Castlereagh. 
As if the cup of ministerial shame were not already full to overflowing, it was 
announced in the House of Commons on Thursday evening, the same evening as the 
Coercion Bill was introduced, that Burke and other Fenian prisoners had been 
tortured to the point of insanity in the English prisons, and in the very face 
of this appalling evidence Gladstone and his jackal Bruce were protesting loudly 
that the political prisoners were treated with all possible care. When Mr. Moore 
made this sad announcement to the House he was constantly interrupted by hoots 
of bestial laughter. Had such a disgusting and revolting scene taken place in 
the American Congress, what a howl of indignation would have gone up from us! 
Up till now the Reynolds's Newspaper, The Times, The Daily News, Pall Mall, The 
Telegraph, etc., etc., have greeted the Coercion Bill with shouts of wild joy, 
particularly the measure for the destruction of the Irish press. And all this is 
taking place in England, the acknowledged sanctuary of the press. But one should 
not, after all, be too angry with these new writers. You will agree that it was 
too hard to watch The Irishman each Saturday demolish the tissue of lies and 
calumny which these Penelopes worked on for six days of the week with sweat on 
their brows, and that it is quite natural that they should give a frantic 
welcome to the police who come to tie the hands of their formidable enemy. At 
least these fine fellows realise their own collective worth. 
A characteristic exchange of letters has taken place between Bruce and Mr. 
M'Carthy Downing concerning Colonel Richard Burke. Before reproducing it I 
should like to remark in passing that Mr. Downing is an Irish member of the 
House of Commons. This ambitious advocate joined the ministerial phalanx with 
the noble aim of making a career. Thus, we are not dealing here with a suspect 
witness. 




February 22, 1870 
Sir, 
If my information is correct, Richard Burke, one of the Fenian prisoners 
formerly held in Chatham Prison, has been transferred to Woking in a state of 
insanity. In March 1869 I took the liberty of bringing his state of apparent 
ill-health to your notice, and in the following July Mr. Blake, former member 
for Waterford, and I informed you of our opinion that if the system of his 
treatment were not changed, the worst consequences were to be feared. I received 
no reply to this letter. My object in writing to you is the cause of humanity 
and the hope of obtaining his release so that his family may have the 
consolation of seeing to his needs and mitigating his suffering. I have in my 
hand a letter from the prisoner to his brother dated December 3 in which he says 
that he has been systematically poisoned, this being, I imagine, one of the 
phases of his disease. I sincerely trust that the kind sentiments for which you 
are known will urge you to grant this request. 
Yours, 
M'Carthy Downing




Home Office, 
February 25, 1870 
Sir, 
Richard Burke was transferred from Chatham as a result of his illusion that he 
was poisoned or cruelly treated by the prison medical officers. At the same 
time, without him being positively ill, his health deteriorated. Consequently, I 
gave orders for him to be moved to Woking and had him examined by Dr. Meyer from 
Broadmoor Asylum, who was of the opinion that his illusion would disappear when 
his health improved. His health did, in fact, improve rapidly and an ordinary 
observer would not have noted any signs of his mental weakness. I should very 
much like to be in a position to give you an assurance of his early release, but 
am not able to do so. His crime and the consequences of the attempt to free him 
are too serious for me to be able to give you such an assurance. Meanwhile all 
that medical science and good treatment can do to restore his mental and 
physical health will be done. 
H. A. Bruce




February 28, 1870 
Sir, 
After receiving your letter of the 25th in reply to my request that Burke should 
be handed over to the care of his brother, I hoped to find an occasion to talk 
to you on this matter in the House of Commons, but you were so busy on Thursday 
and Friday that an interview was out of the question. I have received letters 
from a number of Burke's friends. They are waiting anxiously to hear whether my 
request has been successful. I have not yet informed them that it has not. 
Before disappointing them I felt "justified" in writing to you again on the 
matter. I thought that as a person who has invariably and at some risk denounced 
Fenianism, I could permit myself to give a word of impartial, friendly advice to 
the government. 
I have no hesitation in saying that the release of a political prisoner who has 
become mentally unbalanced would not be criticised and certainly not condemned 
by the general public. In Ireland people would say: "Well, the government is not 
as cruel as we thought." Whereas if, on the other hand, Burke is kept in prison 
this will provide new material for the national press to attack it as being even 
crueller than the Neapolitan governors in their worst days. And I confess that I 
cannot see how men of moderate views could defend the act of refusal in such a 
case... 
M'Carthy Downing




Sir, 
I regret that I am unable to recommend Burke's release. 
It is true that he has shown signs of insanity and that in ordinary cases I 
would be "justified" in recommending him to the mercy of the Crown. But his case 
is not an ordinary one, because he was not only a hardened conspirator, but his 
participation in the attempt to blow up Clerkenwell which, if it had succeeded, 
would have been even more disastrous than it was, makes him an improper 
recipient of pardon. 
H. A. Bruce
Could anything be more infamous! Bruce knows perfectly well that if there had 
been the slightest suspicion against Colonel Burke during the trial concerning 
the attempt to blow up Clerkenwell, Burke would have been hung next to Barrett 
who was sentenced to death on the testimony of a man who had previously given 
false testimony against three other men, and in spite of the evidence of eight 
citizens who made the journey from Glasgow to prove that Barrett had been there 
when the explosion had taken place. The English have no scruples (Mr. Bruce can 
confirm this) when it is a question of hanging a man -- especially a Fenian. 
But all this spate of cruelty cannot break the iron spirit of the Irish. They 
have just celebrated their national holiday, St. Patrick's Day, more 
demonstratively than ever in Dublin. The houses were decorated with flags 
saying: "Ireland for the Irish!", "Liberty!" and "Long live the political 
prisoners!" and the air rang with the sound of their national songs and -- the 
Marseillaise. 
J. Williams





VI



Agrarian Outrages in Ireland 
La Marseillaise, No. 113 
April 12 1870 
London, April 2, 1870 
In Ireland, the plundering and even extermination of the tenant farmer and his 
family by the landlord is called the property right, whereas the desperate 
farmer's revolt against his ruthless executioner is called an agrarian outrage. 
These agrarian outrages, which are actually very few in number but are 
multiplied and exaggerated out of all proportion by the kaleidoscope of the 
English press in accordance with orders received, have, as you will know, 
provided the excuse for reviving the regime of white terror in Ireland. On the 
other hand, this regime of terror makes it possible for the landowners to 
redouble their oppression with impunity. 
I have already mentioned that the Land Bill consolidates landlordism under the 
pretext of giving aid to the tenant farmers. Nevertheless, in order to pull the 
wool over people's eyes and clear his conscience, Gladstone was compelled to 
grant this new lease of life to landlord despotism subject to certain legal 
formalities. It should suffice to say that in the future, its in the past, the 
landlord's word will become law if he succeeds in imposing on his tenants at 
will the most fantastic rents which are impossible to pay or, in the case of 
land tenure agreements, makes his farmers sign contracts which will bind them to 
voluntary slavery. 
And how the landlords are rejoicing! A Dublin newspaper, the Freeman, publishes 
a letter from Father P. Lavelle, the author of The Irish Landlord since the 
Revolution, in which he says: 
"I have seen piles of letters addressed to tenants by their landlord, the brave 
captain, and 'absentee' living in England, warning them that from now on their 
rents are to be raised by 25%. This is equivalent to an eviction notice! And 
this from a man who does nothing for the land except live off its produce!" 
The Irishman on the other hand publishes the new tenure agreements dictated by 
Lord Dufferin, the member of Gladstone's Cabinet who inspired the Land Bill and 
introduced the Coercion Bill in the House of Lords. Add the rapacious shrewdness 
of an expert moneylender and the despicable chicanery of the advocate to feudal 
insolence and you will have a rough idea of the new land tenure agreements 
invented by the noble Dufferin. 
It is now easy to see that the rule of terror has arrived just in time to 
introduce the rule of the Land Bill! Let us suppose, for example, that in a 
certain Irish county the farmers refuse either to allow a 25% rent increase or 
to sign Dufferin's land tenure agreements! The county's landlords will then get 
their valets or the police to send them anonymous threatening letters, as they 
have in the past. This also counts as an "agrarian outrage". The landlords 
inform the Viceroy, Lord Spencer, accordingly. Lord Spencer then declares that 
the district is subject to the provisions of the Coercion Act which is then 
applied by the same landlords, in their capacity as magistrates, against their 
own tenants! 
Journalists who are imprudent enough to protest will not only be prosecuted for 
sedition, but their printing presses will be confiscated without the semblance 
of legal proceedings! 
It should, perhaps, now be obvious why the head of your executive congratulated 
Gladstone on the improvements which he had introduced in Ireland, and why 
Gladstone returned the compliment by congratulating your executive on its 
constitutional concessions. "A Roland for an Olivier"' those of your readers who 
know Shakespeare will say. But others who are more versed in the Moniteur than 
in Shakespeare will remember the letter sent by the head of your executive to 
the late Lord Palmerston containing the words "Let us not act like knaves!" 
Now I shall return to the question of political prisoners, not without good 
cause. 
The publication of Rossa's first letter in the Marseillaise produced a great 
effect in England -- the result is to be an enquiry. 
The following dispatch was printed by all the newspapers in the United States: 
"The Marseillaise says that O'Donovan Rossa was stripped naked once a day and 
examined, that he was starved, that he was locked in a dark cell, that he was 
harnessed to a cart, and that the death of his fellow prisoners was caused by 
the cold to which they were exposed." 
The Irishman's New York correspondent says: 
"The Rochefort Marseillaise has placed the suffering of the Fenian prisoners 
before the eyes of the American people. We owe a debt of gratitude to the 
Marseillaise which, I trust, will be promptly paid." 
Rossa's letter has also been published by the German press. From now onwards the 
English government will no longer be able to commit its outrages in silence. Mr. 
Gladstone will gain nothing from his attempt to silence the Irish press. Each 
journalist imprisoned in Ireland will be replaced by a hundred journalists in 
France, Germany and America. 
What can Mr. Gladstone's narrow-minded, out-of-date policies do against the 
international spirit of the nineteenth century? 
J. Williams





VII



The Death of John Lynch 
La Marseillaise, No. 118 
April 17, 1870 
Citizen Editor, 
I am sending you extracts from a letter written to The Irishman by an Irish 
political prisoner during his detention (he is now at liberty) in a penal colony 
in Australia. 
I shall limit myself to translating the episode concerning John Lynch. 


LETTER FROM JOHN CASEY
The following is a brief, impartial report of the treatment to which my brother 
exiles (twenty-four in number) and I were subjected during our incarceration in 
that pit of horrors, that living tomb which is called Portland Prison. 
Above all it is my duty to pay a tribute of respect and justice to the memory of 
my friend John Lynch who was sentenced by an extraordinary tribunal in December 
1865 and died at Woking Prison in April 1866. 
Whatever may be the cause to which the jury has attributed his death, I confirm, 
and am able to furnish proof, that his death was accelerated by the cruelty of 
the prison warders. 
To be imprisoned in the heart of winter in a cold cell for twenty-three hours 
out of twenty-four, insufficiently clad, sleeping on a hard board with a log of 
wood as a pillow and two worn blankets weighing barely ten lbs. as one's only 
protection against the excessive cold, deprived through an inexpressibly fine 
stroke of cruelty of even covering our frozen limbs with our clothes which we 
were forced to put outside our cell door, given unhealthy, meagre nourishment, 
having no exercise apart from a daily walk lasting three-quarters of an hour in 
a cage about 20 ft. long by 6 ft. wide designed for the worst type of criminals: 
such privation and suffering would break even an iron constitution. So it is not 
surprising that a person as delicate as Lynch should succumb to it almost 
immediately. 
On arrival at the prison Lynch asked for permission to keep his flannels on. His 
request was rudely refused. "If you refuse I shall be dead in three months," he 
replied on that occasion. Ah, little did I suspect that his words would come 
true. I could not imagine that Ireland was to lose one of her most devoted, 
ardent and noble sons so soon, and that I myself was to lose a tried and tested 
friend. 
At the beginning of March I noticed that my friend was looking very ill and one 
day I took advantage of the jailer's brief absence to Ask him about his health. 
He replied that he was dying, that he had consulted the doctor several times, 
but that the latter had not paid the slightest attention to his complaints. His 
cough was so violent that although my cell was a long distance from his, I could 
hear it day and night resounding along the empty corridors. One jailer even told 
me, "Number 7's time will soon he up -- he should have been in hospital a month 
ago. I've often seen ordinary prisoners there looking a hundred times healthier 
than him." 
One day in April I looked out of my cell and saw a skeleton-like figure dragging 
itself along with difficulty and leaning on the bars for support, with a deathly 
pale face, glazed eyes and hollow cheeks. It was Lynch. I could not believe it 
was him until he looked at me, smiled and pointed to the ground as if to say: 
"I'm finished." 
This was the last time I saw Lynch. 
This statement of Casey's corroborates Rossa's testimony about Lynch. And it 
should not be forgotten that Rossa wrote his letter in an English prison whilst 
Casey was writing in an Australian penal colony, making any communication 
between the two of them quite impossible. However, the government has just 
stated that Rossa's assertions are lies. Bruce, Pollock and Knox even declare 
"that Lynch was given flannels before he asked for them". 
On the other hand Mr. Casey insists as firmly as Mr. Bruce denies it that Lynch 
complained that "even when he was incapable of walking and was forced to remain 
in the terrible solitude of his cell his request was refused". 
But as Mr. Laurier said in his beautiful speech: 
"Let us leave aside human testimony and turn to the testimony that does not lie, 
the testimony that does not deceive, the silent testimony." 
The fact remains that Lynch entered Pentonville blooming with life, full of hope 
and, three months later, this young man was a corpse. 
Until Messrs. Gladstone, Bruce and his cohort of police can prove that Lynch is 
not dead, they are wasting their time in vain oaths. 
J. Williams





VIII



Letter from England 
La Marseillaise, No. 125 
April 24, 1870 
London, April 19, 1870 
"No priests in politics" is the watchword which can be heard all over Ireland at 
the moment. 
The large party which has been opposing with all its might the despotism of the 
Catholic Church, ever since the "disestablishment" of the Protestant Church, is 
growing daily with remarkable rapidity and has just dealt the clergy a crushing 
blow. 
At the Longford election the clerical candidate, Mr. Greville-Nugent, beat the 
people's candidate, John Martin, but the nationalists challenged the validity of 
his election because of the illegal means by which it had been won, and got the 
better of their opponents. The election of Nugent was annulled by judge 
Fitzgerald who declared Nugent's agents, that is to say the priests, guiIty of 
having bribed the voters by flooding the country not with the Holy Spirit, but 
with spirits of a different kind. It appeared that in the single month from 
December 1 to January 1 alone the reverend fathers had spent L3,500 on whisky! 
The Standard allows itself to make some most peculiar comments on the Longford 
election: 
"With regard to their scorning of the intimidation by the clergy," writes the 
mouthpiece of the "stupid party", "the nationalists deserve our praise.... The 
great victory which they have won will encourage them to put tip new candidates 
against Mr. Gladstone and his ultramontane allies." 
The Times writes: 
"From the Papal Bull issued in the eternal city to the intrigues of the country 
priests, all ecclesiastical power was lined up against Fenianism and the 
nationalists. Unfortunately this ardour was not accompanied by prudence, and 
will result in a second battle at Longford." 
The Times is right. The battle of Longford will break out again and be followed 
by those of Waterford, Mallow and Tipperary, the nationalists in these three 
counties also having presented petitions requesting the annulment of the 
election of the official members. In Tipperary it was O'Donovan Rossa who first 
won the election, but since Parliament stated that he was incapable of 
representing Tipperary the nationalists proposed Kickham in his place, one of 
the Fenian patriots who has just finished a spell in English prisons. Kickham's 
supporters are now declaring that their candidate has been duly elected in spite 
of the fact that Heron, the government and clerical candidate, gained a majority 
of four votes. 
Bear in mind, however, that one of these four voters for Heron is a wretched 
maniac who was taken to the poll by a reverend father-you know the weakness 
which priests have for the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 
And that the second voter is a corpse! Yes, the honest and moderate party 
actually dared to profane the name of a man who died a fortnight before the 
election by making him vote for a Gladstonian. Apart from this, patriotic voters 
say that eleven of their votes were discounted on the grounds that the first 
letter of Kickham's name was illegible, that their telegrams were not delivered, 
that the authorities were bribing electors right and left and that a base system 
of intimidation was practised. 
The pressure which was brought to bear in Tipperary was unprecedented even in 
the history of Ireland. The bailiff and the policeman, who stand for eviction 
warrants, besieged the tenants' hovels in order to terrify wives and children 
first. The booths in which the voting took place were surrounded by police, 
soldiers, magistrates, landlords and priests. 
The latter hurled stones at people who were putting up posters for Kickham. On 
top of all this, the moneylender was present in the booths, his eyes resting 
hungrily on his wretched debtor during the voting. But the government got 
nothing for all its pains. One thousand six hundred and sixty-eight small 
tenants braved it out and, unprotected by secret ballot, gave their votes openly 
for Kickham. 
This brave act reminds us of the heroic struggle of the Poles. 
Faced with the battles waged in Longford, Mallow, Waterford and Tipperary, will 
anyone still dare to say that the Irish are the abject slaves of the clergy. 
J. Williams 



 
