Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 22 May 1935

Vol. 19 No. 26

Irish Language and Public Services—Motion (Resumed).

Debate resumed on the following motion:—

That the Seanad requests the Executive Council to set up a Commission to consider and report on the further steps which might be taken through the medium of broadcasting, talking pictures and printed publications to supplement and make more effective the work for the Irish language at present being done in the schools.—(Senator Blythe.)

Pádhraic O Máille

Tá moladh mór tuillte ag an Seanadóir Earnán de Blaghd, mar gheall ar an tairisgint seo atá curtha aige ós ar gcómhair. Is gnáthach nuair a bhíos ceisteanna móra poilitiochta ós cómhair na ndaoine go ndéantar dearmad go minic ar an tseód is áille agus is luachmhaire a bhaineas leis an Náisiún Gaedhealach—an chlochbhuinn mar a déarfá—sí sin teanga ársa uasal na tíre.

Tá fhios againn uilig an t-údar agus an fáth a ndeachaidh an Ghaedhilg ar fán i nÉirinn. Nuair a fuair an Sasanach an lámh in uachtar ar Ghaedhealaibh thosaigh meath agus éag ag tígheacht ar Ghaedhealachas agus uaidh sin amach in áit tréartha uaisle dúchais a bheadh faoi mheas san tír isé an chaoi a raibh na daoine ag déanamh úmhlaíochta do bhéasaí agus do nósaí na nGall. Bhí an droch-obair úd ag imeacht 'un cinn le sruth agus gaoith faoi lán-tseól nó go dtugadh an focal faire don tír cúpla scór bliadhan ó shoin ar an gcreach agus an scrios a bhí ar siúl. Is deacair cúl a chur ar thuile bháidhte agus níl sé réidh acht oiread daoine atá ar a n-aimhleas a thabhairt ar a leas arís. Aontuím leis an rud adubhairt an. Seanadóir de Blaghd go gcaithfe muid focla nua a cheapadh san nGaedhilg san gcaoi go mbéidh na daoine in ann trácht agus cur síos a dhéanamh inte ar gach uile athrú a bhéas ag tigheacht 'un cinn san tír. Má bhíonn an teanga in úsáid feasta mar is cóir tiocfaidh na focla a bhéas ag teasdáil uainn chugainn do réir a chéile agus tiocfaidh fás nádúrtha san nGaedhilg do réir mar bhéas an saoghal ag dul 'un tosaigh. Is iomdha duine a bhain slat a bhuailfeadh é féin. Rinne muintir na tíre seo amlaidh nuair a thosaíodar ar sgaradh leis an nGaedhilg. Tá solas agus léargus fáighte acu san sgéal anois agus dá bhrí sin, tiocfaidh na daoine gan mhoill agus le lán-toil ar an mbóthar ceart arís.

Tá aon rud amháin adubhairt an Seanadóir nách bhfuilim ar aon intinn leis ina thaobh. Do réir mo bharúla thug sé an iomarca molta don mhaith a bheadh in aistriúchán, sin innsin in Gaedhilg a chur ar leabhraí a bheadh sgríobhtha i dteangacha eile. Réitím leis go mbeidh na céadta leabhraí nua i nGaedhilg ag teasdáil uainn acht chó fada agus is féidir é b'fhearr iad seo a cheapadh do réir stuaim agus intleachta na nGaedheal ná go mbeadh aon smaoineadh Gallda ag rith tríotha.

An rud a chídhfeas an leanbh, isé ghnídheas an leanbh, agus ar an ábhar sin, is féidir tairbhé mhór a bhaint as pictúirí, agus as fóirleathnú, le suim a thabhairt don aos óg i dteanga a dtíre. Sé an rud is mó a bhí ag tabhairt na Gaedhilge faoi dhrádhamh agus faoi dhrochmheas go raibh bunáite na ndaoine a raibh comhacht agus comhairle aca ag tabhairt chúil agus druim láimhe dhí. Caithfear an gnás tuatach sin a athrú. Deirtear, agus is fíor é, go mb'fhearr gníomh ná caint—agus níl aimhreas ar bith nách bhfuil deis againne san Dáil agus san tSeanad deagh-shompla agus treóir i dtaobh na Gaedhilge a thabhairt don tír.

Tá fhios agam go raibh an Ghaedhilg leigthe an fhad sin as cleachtadh nách bhfuil sé éasga dlithe nua a cheapadh inte. Níl ceist dá dheacra nach féidir a fhuasgailt agus an ceann is fearr a fháil uirthi má téidheann duine dáiríribh ina cionn. In ainm Dé déanaimís tús a chur leis an obair. Is féidir Bille gearr, nó Bille príomháidheach a phlé tré Ghaedhilg ar an gcéad dul amach agus beidh deis againn feabhsú a dhéanamh do réir a chéile.

Níor chaill fear an mhisnigh ariamh é agus nuair atá gníomh mór, fearúil, tír-ghrádhach rómhainn le déanamh, atá athrú tagtha orainn nó beidh fonn orainn beart uasal dá réir a chur i gcionn. Tá ábhar troda agus achrainn againn i dtaobh a lán ceisteanna acht tá aon rud amháin a bhfuil gach uile dheagh-Éireannach ar aon intinn faoi, sé sin, go mba chóir teanga na hEireann a bheith in uachtar arís i nEirinn.

Mr. Comyn

When I seconded this motion I reserved my right to speak upon it. I am glad I did reserve that right until I heard the speech delivered by Senator O Maille because that speech represents the real Irish— the Irish that has survived through generations and centuries as a cultured tongue, a beautiful language, and a language worth preserving. It is not Dáil Irish, it is not compulsory Irish. It is the real natural Irish of our forefathers, and it well deserves every effort that can be made to preserve and revive it as a living tongue. I must say this that that language has been losing ground rapidly for the last 40 or 50 years. I remember many years ago reading the wail of an enthusiast who said:

"It is fading, it is fading like the leaves upon the trees.

It is dying, it is dying like the Western Ocean's breeze.

It is fastly disappearing like footprints on the shore,

Where the Barrow and the Erne and Lough Swilly's waters roar."

Fifty years ago that song was written by an enthusiast for the language. The processes of decay of the real Irish tongue have been going on ever since, and are going on to-day, notwithstanding the money spent upon the revival and the restoration of the Irish tongue. In this Seanad there is a very appropriate platform for discussing the question and for analysing the reasons for that decay. I come myself from an Irish speaking district. The Irish language was the first language I heard. I did not pay the same attention to it in those years that Padraic O Maille paid to it. But it comes back to me, and comes back a lovely tongue, notwithstanding the fact that it ceased to develop about 400 or 500 years ago.

I ask the House to think for one moment what would the English language be to-day if it had suddenly become stunted before the time of St. Thomas More or of Bacon or of Shakespeare? At that time, the Irish language far surpassed the English language as a literary tongue. Let us consider for one moment the reasons why this revival has not been so successful as it might have been. It has suffered from fanaticism—fanatical support on one side and fanatical hostility on the other. You can never revive this language until it becomes the language of educated men; until professors in the universities and members of the Dáil and Seanad, people to whom the ordinary man looks up, speak their native tongue; until the man who has to buy a beast in the fair speaks in Irish; until the man who goes around selling cloth, the commercial traveller, and every person who is supposed to have superior intelligence begin to speak Irish. Until then, you will never get the poor and the uneducated to revive the language. If an Irish-speaking boy comes in contact with an English-speaking boy, he says to himself: "There is a boy with the English tongue; he has the education, the opportunity and every advantage while I have nothing but an Irish tongue in my head and poverty in my home." And what happens? The English-speaking boy will not learn Irish from the Irish-speaking boy because he will not get the opportunity, but the Irish-speaking boy will use every effort to acquire from the English-speaking boy a knowledge of the English tongue.

That is what happens. English was not preserved or revived as the language of the ordinary people. It was revived because it became the language of the court and because it was the language spoken by people to whom the ordinary man looked up. It was the language of Chaucer, who was associated with princes. It is from above that a language can be preserved and restored and not from below. There are many reasons for that. I have given the social reason but there is another, and, perhaps, an equally strong reason, why the language spoken by the poor people is not a good Irish language. It is not the real Irish tongue, except in cases in which that language has been preserved by people who have been driven back in the various wars. You will find the most lovely Irish spoken in some parts of the County Mayo and in some of the uplands between Connaught and Munster, but that is the language of a people who were driven back by warfare and who still preserve, in all its purity, their native tongue.

How is the real Irish to be preserved? That is the problem which has been touched upon, and rather well dealt with, by Senator Blythe and Senator O Maille. The first thing to do, I think, is to preserve, so far as we can, the Irish idiom. There is a turn of speech which is Irish and which is very beautiful. How can that Irish idiom be preserved? By writers, but, as Senator Blythe said in his speech, you do not get the creative mind every day. A genius will not arise in every generation, and reading poor Irish is worse than useless. In considering that aspect of this question, it occurred to me that the best way to preserve our Irish idiom would be to get people born in the Gaeltacht, native speakers, who understand that Irish idiom, to make translations into Irish of the masterpieces in other languages. The idiom at least would be preserved in that way. Original work does not come by State support or by subsidy. The genius will write, whatever adversity overtakes him. He is like the nightingale singing in the midst of the storm, and singing most sweetly when the storm is greatest and the thunder loudest. The man of genius will write without reward, but he does not come in every generation. Therefore, I think the best way to preserve the Irish idiom in so far as it can now be preserved—and I think it can be wholly preserved—is to get Irish speakers who have the Irish idiom to make translations into Irish of the great works in other languages.

That is one suggestion I make to the Seanad. It must have crossed the minds of Senators frequently that, notwithstanding the great sums which have been spent in the revival of this language, very little real progress has been made. I think it is true to say that no single Department of the State is Irish through and through. I think it is also no slander to say that a good many boys who have learned Irish for the purpose of their examination have ceased to speak Irish once the examination is passed. What is to be done in that case? I would make a tentative suggestion that these young people should get a week's holiday to go down to the Gaeltacht and to speak Irish. That might do some good. Of course, what would be the greatest good of all would be if my friends on the opposite benches—Senator Browne, Senator Sir John Griffith, and Senator Douglas—would even say a few words of salutation in Irish when they meet a person. It is easily learned. I agree with Senator Blythe that it would be a waste of money to encourage broadcast the writing of Irish books by every person who thinks he is a writer. There were only a few good writers in the past generation. There were two. There was Padraic O Conaire, a man of creative mind, and also Canon O Laoghaire. Their works are classics. Senator Blythe did not mention any names, but I mention these two names and I mention one book by Canon O Laoghaire, "Seadhna," which in itself is worth all the cost of the Irish revival, because there is preserved the idiom of Munster, and he has there shown to us and to future generations that even in our day we had preserved a language which was capable of taking its place very high amongst the languages of the world.

The Senator might also have referred to some of the writers of the past. There were in the 17th century a good many men of genius, who wrote in the Irish tongue. Whether their work was creative or not, it is hard for me to say, because I remember, as a boy, hearing fishermen reciting stories to each other which I thought were original, but which I know were beautiful, and it was only years afterwards that I discovered that these fishermen were reciting to each other the Lay of Oisin, a most lovely poem and a lovely story which they had committed to memory and other lays and other stories which, I believe, are now lost forever. The question is whether the Lay of Oisin was original work or merely a story handed down from generation to generation in this country. In any case, it represents the heroic age of the Gael and, for that reason, I mention it as a work in which Irish idiom, Irish thought and Irish language is crystallised and preserved.

I do not think I should finish these references without mentioning another work which is before our eyes every day. The best modern Irish I have read and the most copious and the most accurate is the Irish contained in the rules and orders of this House. I am glad to have an opportunity in this debate of mentioning that and of paying a tribute to whoever deserves that tribute. Senator Blythe has confined his Motion to the establishment of a commission to consider and report on the steps which are necessary through broadcasting, talking pictures and printed publications to supplement the work that has already been done. With regard to broadcasting, the difficulty is that what is broadcast is spoken only once and it is very hard for a person to get any real advantage from Irish which is spoken only once. It occurred to me that, as a means of learning the Irish tongue, gramophone records would perhaps be the better method for people who have not any Irish speakers in their homes. With regard to talking pictures, it will, I should say, be some time before we can have a drama in Irish spoken by actors who have a thorough knowledge of Irish idiom and pronounciation—such a knowledge as deserves to be perpetuated. With regard to printed publications, bad Irish, of course, is a frightful calamity. There is a great lot of bad Irish spoken and written, particularly spoken. I am not surprised that some people are fanatically opposed to Irish because the stuff they hear is enough to make any one disgusted. In regard to printed publications, I think that they should be confined as much as possible to translations of the works of the master minds in other countries and to the works of men in this country who really can write original matter. With these observations, I beg to support the motion.

Mr. Baxter

The motion in the name of Senator Blythe, although very specific and definite, gives us an opportunity to say, perhaps in general terms, what we think of the position of Irish in the country to-day. The reception of the motion by the Seanad is, I think, very encouraging. It is encouraging that this House, which has been styled even by some of its own members as being the last outpost of British imperialism, should be prepared to accept with such unanimity a motion like this in the circumstances of to-day. It is very becoming that, in its period of old age, this imperialist institution should be prepared to take the Irish language to its bosom with such unanimity. But it is even more fitting that this motion should be brought forward in the name of Senator Blythe. In my view, no more strongly separatist speech was ever made in this House than the speech which the Senator made in introducing the motion. If there is one thing that, above all else, stamps this country as a nation, separate and distinct, which in the future is going to give our people a distinctive outlook—national, cultural and economic and different in most ways from that of our nearest neighbour—it is the possession or the rejection by our people of their native language.

The speech that was made by Senator Blythe in introducing the motion, gave evidence of very deep thought—in the very wide field over which he travelled and in the reasons he advanced why the motion should be accepted by the House. It demonstrated to all of us that in Senator Blythe we have to-day the same individual who, as a young man, left the Protestant plantation of the North, his home and his friends who were very dear to him, and went away to the Gaeltacht in order that he might acquire a knowledge of the language of his country and play his part in re-establishing this nation: giving her back her rights.

Now, the truth is that the Irish language is in real danger to-day. That fact may as well be faced at once. Some thoughtful students advocate that the language can only be saved by ceasing to subsidise what they call the enemy: in other words, the English language. That would be a very extreme step indeed to take. It is a matter on which I do not feel called upon to pass judgment, but the fact is that there are people who think like that. The fact that there are people who think along that line indicates clearly that there is an urgent necessity for the setting up of a commission to consider the present-day position of the Irish language. I think that, in justice, this debate should not conclude without some tribute being paid to one group of people in this country who have done, and are doing, real work for the restoration of the Irish language. I refer to the national school teachers. With the exception of the national school teachers, there are very few others doing very much for the restoration of the national language. It is true, of course, to say that the national school teachers are being paid for their work, but I think it is worthy of notice that they are doing that work under very considerable difficulties indeed. In view of all that we are forced to ask, why are the results of all their efforts not more apparent? I think the truth of the matter is that, beyond what is being done in the schools and what the teachers are doing to create a favourable atmosphere for the restoration of the language, nothing is being done outside the schools at all. If one meets children coming from school and addresses them in Irish, they will stand in amazement and astonishment when they find a grown-up person speaking to them in their national language outside the school. In my opinion the atmosphere outside the school is wholly unfriendly and unsympathetic: at best it is apathetic.

I think that we may as well admit the truth in connection with the position. It is this: that amongst a great many who are supposed to be extremely national no effort whatever is being made to re-establish the Irish language as the spoken language of the country. In fact, I would go so far as to suggest that many of our most extreme nationalists are doing most to retard the restoration of the national language. Some, it is true, have no use whatever for it, and others are killing it with kindness. There are some very strong advocates for the restoration of the Irish language in the country to-day, but their methods make such a poor appeal, because they themselves are so extreme and so intolerant, that a great many people who have a genuine desire to see the day when the Irish language will again be spoken by the great majority of the people, feel that those extreme and intolerant people who would deny to others the sort of liberty they would like to enjoy themselves, typify the Gael and what is best in Gaelic culture and Gaelic civilisation. Some feel that in these people there is something that they should not seek to have restored as being the best that the country can produce or that is really worthy of it.

When one thinks to-day of what the atmosphere must have been like in the early days of the Gaelic League, when you had in that movement great numbers of the most cultured sons and daughters of the country, of people possessed of high ideals and with clear views as to what order of society they would like to see built up here, and compare that position with the views expressed to-day by some of those who suggest that they themselves are the inheritors of those who established the Gaelic League, one must feel convinced that these latter have wandered very far away indeed from the ideals of the founders of the original language movement. It is there that I feel there is the greatest need in the country to-day. We have no channel into which can be turned those who are leaving our national schools. We have no organisations into which the boys and girls can go, organisations to which they would be attracted by men and women of high ideals, organisations in which the language would be spoken and in which it would be used as the medium of expression in sport and literature and in every form of national activity, organisations that could make our people feel that our national language was worth preserving and worth working for.

To-day we should aim at trying to establish in this country some form of cultural organisations in which men with clear views might meet, men with views as clear as those expressed by Senator Blythe and others who may differ politically from him but whose views on the Irish language are as clear as his, others who have not political views one way or another but all united by a common desire to work for the re-establishment of the Irish language. There is no such organisation in the country to-day, and because there is not those who are anxious and willing to help have not the means at hand of doing so. Even the young people and those who are going to the universities: all those who love the language and have attained a high standard of proficiency in speech and writing through the medium of Irish—people who feel a pride in using the language in an efficient way—they have no common ground on which they can gather. So far as the Irish language is concerned, there is evidence on all sides of this great need in the cultural and literary life of the country to-day. I am not able to say whether the Government, by setting up the commission that has been suggested by Senator Blythe, can do anything to remedy that situation, but at any rate if such a commission were set up the opinions of those competent to speak on the matter could be obtained. I have no doubt whatever that the setting up of such a commission would create a new spirit and a new atmosphere, and that is very badly needed if the language is to survive.

There are all sorts of difficulties for enthusiasts in the language movement to-day. Parents who have young families growing up are very interested in this. They know the difficulties that the children have to face, with all sorts of anglicising influences around them. Certain difficulties were stressed by Senator Comyn. Perhaps they might have been more strongly stressed. There is, for instance, the lack of reading matter to which Senator Blythe devoted so much of his speech. We cannot expect to have a Pádraic O Conaire in every generation, but people of his rare genius ought to be put into such a contented state that they would be able to devote their activities to the production of creative literature which the language so badly needs. We may have one or two of those people with us still. It would be interesting to see how much of their time these people can devote to the creative work necessary for the language. Go into the Gaeltacht to-day and what do you find? There are libraries in every county. Thousands of books are being circulated in the Gaeltacht areas, but how many of them are in the language of the Gael? One has to regret the conditions that exist when so little seems possible, on the part of those who have passed school age, in the work of restoring the Irish language. From 1916 to 1920 the young men and young women were in five or six different organisations. They were in Sinn Féin clubs, football and hurling clubs, in the Volunteer movement and in branches of the Gaelic League. Practically every parish had all these organisations, and, at the same time, these boys and girls were going on with their work in the different fields as vigorously, at least, as are the boys and girls of to-day. We have activities to-day of a different class, but what has come upon us? Where is the initiative that our people had then? Have we become less patriotic or are we substituting a perverted form of patriotism —a misunderstanding of the real values of patriotic endeavour? I am afraid we have to admit that Irishmen will make a great burst, but do not seem capable of a sustained effort. In nothing more than the endeavour for the restoration of the language is there evidence of this lack of persistence on the part of our people. I was reading recently a description of the Irish character by a German who had written a book on the possibilities of another war. The book did not indicate whether this foreigner had ever come amongst us, but this is what he said of us: "Such a mentality is only too often content to have conceived the idea of something without going on to translate it into action. Day-dreaming about how a thing should be done plus, if possible, the loud admiration of an enthusiastic audience are enough for the Irishman. Hence, he confuses the means to the end with the end in itself and he cannot carry through a job which needs patience and application." I read and re-read that paragraph, and I was amazed at the insight of this German. I am convinced that there is a great deal of truth in what he says, and anybody who considers the conditions to-day as regards the restoration of the Irish language must be absolutely satisfied that the language movement is going to fail if the people of the country who pretend they want the language restored will not put more effort into their work than they have been doing for the past six or seven years. We have men and women and boys and girls proclaiming their patriotism from the housetops. They are, apparently, more ready to die for their country than they are to live for it.

When they come up against the question of what are the essentials for the restoration of a full and complete national life, they have no views whatever. Where is the weakness? With whom is the responsibility for this condition of affairs, so unlike the conditions some of us knew ten or twelve years ago? It is because of that spirit, evident up and down the country, that a great many of the thoughtful people who are very strong, very keen and very sad about the position of Irish in the country feel so very perturbed. I think that this motion by Senator Blythe, if accepted, as Senator Connolly rather suggested it would be, should stimulate a new interest in the revival and restoration of the Irish language. If it did nothing more than bring together the language enthusiasts who assembled at the presentation to Doctor Douglas Hyde a few nights ago, and if a new cultural organisation were formed to restore the language of the country to its proper place, this motion by Senator Blythe would have done a great deal. It is very fitting that this House should accept the motion in the spirit which it has displayed up to the present. If the people want the Irish language restored, they ought to be honest and straight about it. It cannot be done except by a different kind of effort from that which is being made to-day. If the people of the country, many of whom are so loud in their protestations of patriotism, are really sincere, they ought to be put to the test. If they fail, it will be the danger signal for this country's future. What the German said about us is true. We confuse the intention to do the thing with the doing of it, and the people who are incapable of doing more than that can never hope to restore their language to its place in the nation or the nation to its place amongst the nations of the world.

Colonel Moore

I have been so long in this movement and have spoken and written so much about it that I shall say only a few words on this motion. I listened to Senator Baxter's speech with some little astonishment. To say that the Irish people, who fought a losing battle for 700 years, are deficient in staying power seems very stupid. To say that the effort for the restoration of the Irish language during the past 30 years shows the same thing is even more stupid. To back up his statement, the Senator goes off to Germany and quotes the letter or book of some professor. Senator Baxter also said that the national schools were the only saviours of the language. I do not blame the school masters in the least but, as a matter of fact, it was the schools that killed the language. The language was flourishing until the English brought in their Bill to establish national schools. Then, the language commenced to fail. The Archbishop of Tuam, who was our great supporter in those times, prophesied that that would be so and opposed the establishment of the national schools for that reason. The national schools will now, I am sure, endeavour to bring the language back.

I do not at all agree with what several Senators have said, that very little has been done for the improvement of the language position. I have been in the language movement for the last 30 years and, during all that time, it has been working steadily and overcoming numerous difficulties. A large part of its activities was necessarily devoted to propaganda. The real facts of the case are only now being faced. We had first to prove these things and change the opinions of a number of the most influential people in the country. In the middle of the university crisis, the Chief Secretary for Ireland stated, in my hearing, that he did not believe the Irish people would be so stupid as to make Irish compulsory in the universities, that it would be a great disaster to the universities. Exactly the opposite has been the case. We fought a great battle at that time and won it. What is to be done now? I suggest that, when the national school children go to school, they should first have a prayer in Irish in which they could all join. That prayer should be broadcast regularly at the same time to all the schools. I should have songs in Irish broadcast and also some verses. Or perhaps these could be repeated on the gramophone. I think that that would be a practical thing to do. I do not believe that it will take 40 years for the Irish language to come forward. I think it will come forward in less than 20 years, because it is only now we are getting at the children in the schools. The present generation may not be Irish speakers but the next generation will be. It took 700 years to establish the English language in this country. We, who have our hearts in the matter, will do a great deal better and will bring the Irish language into general use in a comparatively short time. Twenty or 30 years ago, Lord Ashbourne said to me:

"At present Irish is being spoken in the bogs. The time will come when English will be spoken in the bogs and Irish in the universities."

That is coming very close, because children who are seeking positions in the Civil Service and other employment will have to learn Irish. It is the same with regard to doctors and lawyers. That will be a great impulse to the spread of the language.

Mr. Boyle

I followed the speech of Senator Blythe with the greatest interest. It was a fairly long speech but there was not a word too much in it, as the Senator could have spoken at greater length on such an important subject. I considered what contribution I could make to the debate, and while a number of avenues suggested themselves, I felt really that the amount of time that could be devoted by this House to a consideration of this question would not be sufficient to cover what those interested in education would be able to suggest. For that reason it would not be proper to dwell at length on many matters that I intended to deal with. It would be more appropriate and more profitable to have them dealt with before the suggested commission of inquiry if and when it is set up. No one will dispute the fact that it is eminently desirable that the maximum results should be secured from the efforts that are being made to restore our native language and culture. As Senator Blythe and the Minister for Lands pointed out, all national opinion is agreed on that. To those who have a direct interest in education it is a matter of no little satisfaction to realise that there is growing appreciation of the main difficulties encountered in the efforts to make our young people Irish speaking. There is a growing appreciation of the fact that no matter how effective the work in the schools is, and no matter how efficient the teaching is, so long as the majority of boys and girls leave school and go into a wholly English speaking atmosphere, there is something wanting. While that continues and whilst there is no vigorous encouragement given to persevere in the post-school period with the practice of the language acquired in the schools, so long will the greater part of the work done to revive the language be nullified. It is a very encouraging sign to see that there is a growing appreciation of this fact by those interested in education.

If these means of improving our educational methods and of making more effective the work of the schools can be utilised in the manner suggested by Senator Blythe, so as to give the children the fashion of utilising the cinema, assuming that suitable films are available, or the radio, if suitable broadcast programmes are available, it would be all to the good. The habit acquired might reasonably be expected to continue. The question that presents itself to most people is, can we afford the necessary outlay to put such a scheme as this into operation? The amount spent on education in this country is large but not larger than the importance of this social service demands. Assuming that the efficacy of these aural and visual methods suggested as complementary to those in vogue is established after careful inquiry, can we afford them? I believe these methods can usefully be employed within limits and that the real question is this: whilst admittedly a large amount is spent on education, can we afford not to spend the little more necessary to utilise them, if, by so doing, we will get the fullest return on the efforts and the money spent in the laudable endeavours that are being made to restore our national language and culture? Can we afford to neglect making that outlay? We have done very little experimental work in this country but we are fortunate in this respect, that we have available the results of educational experiments that were tried out all over the world—in Great Britain, France, United States, Italy, Germany and Japan, etc. Most progressive countries have devoted a considerable amount of attention to research work in this field to find out how best the cinema can be utilised, not only for juvenile education, but for adult mass education, and the tabulated results of such research are very interesting for any commission that may be set up, in addition to the evidence that our own nationals may be able to give. There is one obvious method of lessening to a certain extent the flaw in the present machinery for reviving the language. We are agreed that the majority of our boys and girls leave school and go into an English-speaking atmosphere before they get sufficient practice in utilising their school-acquired knowledge of the language. Is it not obvious that if we increase, even by one year, the school-going age, that a great deal of good would accrue? That is a proposal that, I think, members of the Seanad and the Dáil who are affiliated with the Labour Party would approve of from a different standpoint.

There is another consideration. Many Senators and others perhaps consider the suggested methods are intended merely to improve the efficacy of the teaching of the language itself. Undoubtedly they could be made very useful adjuncts in the teaching of other subjects. There are subjects that immediately suggest themselves as highly appropriate ones, in which the cinema could be used as a valuable adjunct, subjects such as history, geography, hygiene, nature study or rural science. Apart from the fact that a large amount of such work could be done in the Irish language, the use of the cinema and the radio would make the study of these subjects more interesting and would lessen the drudgery. The children would then be able to tackle the language proper with greater vigour. It has been established as a result of experiments carried out by educational authorities elsewhere, that undoubtedly there has been a decided increase in what I might term initial learning and an appreciable economy in time where the ordinary methods in vogue have been supplemented by educational films. Films are very valuable aids in the education of backward children. There is increased retention and it is reasonably contended that there is lessened brain fag and drudgery associated with the work of the school.

I had a certain amount of diffidence about approaching this subject, but I will refer to another point that I should like Senator Blythe to consider. I am not speaking for anyone but myself. As a teacher who apart from 25 years' practical experience has experience on various educational committees, I consider that the cinema can be made a very useful adjunct not only in primary but in secondary and vocational education. It is especially most desirable that it should be used in what are called rural schools as contemplated under the Vocational Education Act if the full benefits of education to be imparted therein are to be gained by our rural population. The cinema could be used in education to a considerable extent, and I suggest that there is an opportunity for co-operation between agricultural committees, and vocational committees, and primary schools. If an agricultural or a vocational education committee had a portable projector it might be made available for other bodies in the county that wish to use it. I am satisfied that such co-operation would be very valuable and would result in substantial benefit to the schools. I am not so much concerned with this motion in so far as it deals solely with child education, but before I pass from this particular question I should like to say that I am in agreement with the contention that where properly utilised the film offers a valuable educational dividend to the teacher, to the child, and to the curriculum. Whether we are agreed or not that a commission is an effective means of achieving the object sought, I think we can agree that if a commission is set up, or if there is to be an inquiry to see whether the work could be done more effectively if aided by these means it would not be reasonable to expect a fresh commission to be set up to inquire into other phases of film activities. It is very desirable that this commission should go into all the aspects of film activity whether educational, hygienic, moral or cultural.

Cathaoirleach

If you desire to amend or to extend the motion I cannot allow that.

Mr. Boyle

I am not moving an amendment.

Cathaoirleach

I suggest that you are.

Mr. Boyle

I will relate my point to the motion.

Cathaoirleach

You have not related it up to the present.

Mr. Boyle

I suggest that if the work being done for the Irish language in the schools is to be made more effective the efforts to supplement it must not be confined to the schools. Surely the education of the child does not end when it leaves school. The last speakers dealt with the after-school methods of reviving the language, and even with the view of a German author on Irish character. I submit that this motion is mainly designed to make more effective the educational work done for the language in the schools. Am I to take it that I can address myself to the general matter dealt with by Senator Blythe?

Cathaoirleach

Surely.

Mr. Boyle

If that is so I am satisfied that the suggestions I have made are not out of order.

Cathaoirleach

The point is that I object to bringing in schools as a medium for the establishment of Irish in secondary schools or other schools of that nature. The Senator was trying to relate secondary schools and I was asking him not to do so.

Mr. Boyle

I submit that vocational and secondary schools are being utilised to teach the Irish language. It is essential to my argument that that fact should be recognised by the Chair.

Cathaoirleach

Very well.

Mr. Boyle

Incidentally I may say that as a member of a Vocational Education Committee I am aware that in future teachers will not be appointed to these schools unless they can teach subjects through Irish. I suggest that if the ideas underlying this proposal of Senator Blythe are to be made effective, we must go beyond the work done in the schools. Speakers have expressed appreciation of the work of the teachers and of the difficulties arising in the post-primary school period, but I take it that this motion aims at extending the educational course beyond the school-going period. If that is the desire, the Commission should deal with all cinema activity. It is desirable to inquire how best to achieve fully the objects in view. In so far as there might be a greater inducement to the Government to set up a committee if the scope were widened, I suggest that this should be done so as to make the inquiry deal with other vital matters connected with the cinema than those specifically mentioned by Senator Blythe in his motion. We cannot contemplate with equanimity the millions of pounds spent on education if we see that much of the work done in the schools is nullified after the school-going age in a most attractive and seductive way by the cinemas, without taking such steps as ordinary prudence suggests. Apart from the negative action of the censorship, nothing positive has been done to make the cinema an educational or cultural asset to the nation. That is all the more strange since I think every one of us has ideas as to the vast potentialities of the cinema for good on the future social, moral and educational welfare of our people. Whether its educational value is utilised in the Irish or English language, it is absolutely necessary that it should be availed of and turned to good purpose in the future.

We should also enquire into the effect of the cinema on Irish culture, and in this connection we should have regard to the best way of raising the standard of public appreciation of films. The cinemas should also be used for the purpose of agricultural instruction and in the spheres of industry, hygienic and general education. That, of course, could nearly all be done through the medium of the Irish language and could be done in a very effective way both for the spread of the language and for what is being specially taught through the agency of the film. Even were we to confine ourselves to the terms of Senator Blythe's motion it is absolutely essential that the production of films themselves should be gone into. We should go into the question of the manufacture of our films, no matter how limited our efforts must necessarily be, because the ideas we have of culture in the Free State are contrary to the notions of modern films as portrayed in imported films. It is also essential that we should devise a system of national control of the importation and distribution of films, with special reference to the present renting system. There is no use building up and then finding that what we have erected as regards character formation in the schools is being knocked down again. I am not suggesting, for a moment, that the objects Senator Blythe has put forward are of minor importance, but he will, I am sure, agree that it is most important that full enquiries should be made into all these matters. I am merely stressing the points which had been stressed by many others interested in cinema activity, by social workers who realise the futility of merely negative action and are alive to the necessity of providing alternative films which will interest and amuse our people. It is necessary to use this valuable medium constructively with an explicit realisation of what can be achieved by its use.

There is a difficulty, and I think Senator Blythe will appreciate it, that in addressing oneself to this motion so many thoughts strike one that there is a tendency to go off at a tangent occasionally when speaking to the motion. Senator Blythe doubted whether it was practical to apply sound production to silent films. As far as I understand, "Man of Aran" was shot as a silent picture, the sound being subsequently recorded at Sheppard's Bush. One of the difficulties that the promoters of the use of educational films in this country will experience will be the procuring of suitable sound films, but there are many silent films that could be utilised. It is possible to attach synchronising sound apparatus, using discs, to silent machines. The cost of educational films is sure to be put down as an objection. Suppose we take history or geography or nature study films. Then, instead of having one commentary it would be possible, by this synchronising process, to have half a dozen separate commentaries each suitable to the different standards to be catered for. Here there is the advantage that when the record was worn out only the sound-producing portion need be renewed. I mentioned this minor matter because it seems to me that the cost need not be as great as many people seem to think.

One of the things that struck me forcibly on the question of films was the use that is being made of them abroad for adult mass education. This is very largely the case in other progressive countries. Very valuable work in cultural and educational film production is done in Germany, for instance, and has also been done in Italy, Austria and Yugo-Slavia and so on. In 1924 the Italian Government decided on a wheat campaign. Their idea was to improve matters in regard to the cultivation of wheat, and to educate the farmers in that direction so as to improve their methods and give an increased yield. The Luce Institute, a concern independent of the State, released a film entitled "The Wheat Campaign." One hundred and twenty copies were sent to the different towns and exhibited, with the result that the films were seen by 5,000,000 or 6,000,000 people. The effect was that the Italian Government decided to spend 500,000 lire on propaganda by means of the cinema, directing attention purely to the technical training. The same applies to films on matters of health. I discussed this question myself with doctors and they were greatly enamoured with the idea of releasing films having an educative effect in connection with diseases and sanitary matters. The Luce Institute, which I have just mentioned, has produced valuable films dealing with tuberculosis, open-air life, health education for children, sanatoria, healthy houses, food, hygiene, etc.

In the United States great work is done in the Federal Department of Agriculture through the operation of the cinema. Films there familiarise the farmers with the latest and most modern methods of agriculture, and the portable projector is in widespread use in the most remote parts of the States.

The Republic of Yugo-Slavia presents a very interesting comparison with ourselves here in the Free State. It is a State depending largely upon agriculture. The people there are faced with many problems similar to those that confront us. They had no film industry to start with, but they showed they were not to be dismayed and made rapid strides. Films that have a cultural value amount to 10 per cent. of those shown in Yugo-Slavia; 15 per cent. must be home-produced, whether cultural or otherwise. Imported films in excess of quantity allowed have to pay a very heavy fine on admission and that money goes towards the production of national films. The percentage of cultural films shown in most countries is not unduly high. It is very desirable that we should have a reasonable proportion of such, but one of the difficulties of encouraging such production and raising the standard of public taste is very largely a question of expense. Film producers will not produce films that are unprofitable. I think it is desirable that in the ordinary film programme a place should be kept for films of a cultural value of at least 15 minutes' duration. That would establish a market and would make it easier for film producers to engage in the production of cultural films.

There is just another aspect of the question of cinemas which might be touched upon. Our children grow up in our schools with necessarily limited tastes and knowledge, and they very often acquire a taste for, and select a trade or occupation, for which they afterwards prove unsuited. If the cinematograph were in use in matters of this kind, showing the requirements of the different trades, it would awaken the hidden potentialities in children and enable them more accurately to select their occupations. In various continental cinemas such use is made of films as a complement to the teaching and selection of trades. However, I am afraid I have broken the resolution I made at the beginning not to dilate unduly on many aspects of this question. I think if a commission is set up and if the scope of the inquiry is extended to include most of the things I mentioned in this debate as worthy of coming under its purview, very much good will accrue to the nation. I believe that a central film institute will yet be set up, and that as a result of its activities the next generation will be morally, physically and educationally much better than it would be if the various interests that control our cinemas are allowed to pursue a policy of drift with the inevitable result that the taste of our young people in films would continue to be fashioned on productions the sole reason for the exhibition of which is their reputed power to swell the box office receipts.

Donnchadha O hEaluighthe

Beatha teanga í labhairt. Tá brón orm ná rabhas i ndon éisteacht leis an méid a bhí le rá ag Seanadóir Pádraic O Máille, ach táim in aghaidh an Rún seo mar ní dóigh liom go dtiocfadh aon mhaitheas as.

I do not intend to delay the Seanad very long as I have some respect for the time of Senators, but some of the speeches which I heard here undoubtedly compel me to make some reference to them. In the first place, I have no faith or hope of any advance being made through cinemas or silent or sound pictures. I listened to the Leas-Chathaoirleach, the Vice-Chairman of the Seanad, stating that the language is fading for the last 40 or 50 years. I am one of that little band that was associated with the early work of the Gaelic League Movement, and I will have to make some reference to that fact. I joined the Blackrock Branch in 1898—37 years ago. My first teacher was Domhnall O Conaire, who was a chartered accountant with offices in Westmoreland Street, and who died only some weeks ago. He put me through my first lesson books of O'Growney. I remember then the little Irish that was heard in Dublin. We endeavoured to promote our studies and to study the language, and in our enthusiasm we organised branches of the League in the City and County of Dublin. We had to study our lessons in the trams and in the trains, and try and impart a little knowledge to those we were instructed to teach. That was the position in those days. I remember one of the first letters I got to translate in Blackrock was a letter which came from a gentleman in Carrickmacross. I want to point out the headway that has been made, despite the statement made here by the Vice-Chairman of the Seanad. A letter was sent by a gentleman from Carrickmacross to a young student in Blackrock College, and it was brought out to me to translate. Will Senators cast their mind back to that fact, when a letter was sent to a person like me struggling through the Third Book of O'Growney to translate, and compare that with what is being done for Irish in the colleges and schools throughout the country to-day? Let us look back a little. Some public men in those days had not the same idea of the national interest as the younger generation had. The late Mr. Arthur Griffith, in his early writings, taught and wrote that we could become a nation speaking the English language, and he instanced the case of America. But be it said to Mr. Griffith's credit that he very soon changed his mind in that matter.

In these days we were very hard set for teachers. I, myself, taught Irish in the Gaelic League branches in Rathmines, Rathfarnham, Lucan, Leixlip, Celbridge and Skerries. We had no regular teachers in these days. There were no training colleges and no Gaeltacht colleges in which people could be trained to teach the language. We had to do the best we could against all kinds of odds, and our work certainly was not in vain. I remember the first Dublin Feis, which was held on St. Patrick's Day, 1901, in the Round Room of the Rotunda. We had a Feis in Dublin this very week which lasted the entire week. The first Dublin Feis lasted for some days, and all the rooms of the Rotunda were occupied. The statement that the language has been dying for the past 40 years is, in my view, a desperate statement for a public man to make. I propose to move, as an amendment to this motion, whether I get a seconder or not, that this proposed appointment of a commission be postponed for six months. Some of us remember the joke that used to be made in the old days about commissions. We had the idea then that they were an excuse for shelving or postponing pressing questions, and my own opinion is that nothing can be done for the teaching of the language through the medium of broadcasting or films.

Let us take one particular sentence in Irish and see if it would be possible for a beginner to learn it through the medium of broadcasting. I do not mean to cast any slur on either the language of Cumann na nGaedheal or Fianna Fáil; I merely quote this to show what little could be done through the medium of broadcasting. The sentence is: Beidh ag imtheacht in aonfeacht leat anocht chun eisteacht le droc-Ghaedhilge Fianna Fáil nó Cumann na nGaedheal. I do not want to bring any politics into this; I only want to show what chance a beginner listening to that coming over the wireless will have of understanding it. To beginners, those sounds are very hard, and some of us who have experience of studying and teaching the language found that it was much more difficult to correct bad pronunciation than it was to give good pronunciation in the beginning.

There are very hard sounds in Irish for the beginner. How many in this House address you, a Chathaoirligh, correctly? How many members pronounce the word "Cathaoirleach" correctly or pronounce the words "Cumann na nGaedheal" properly? How many members of Senator Blythe's organisation pronounce it properly, and how many members pronounce the final "l" in "Fianna Fáil" correctly? I am one of those who have been through this question and I claim that I understand what I am speaking about.

Senator Baxter made some reference to the indifference of the children to the language question after leaving school. I would advise Senator Baxter, or any other Senator who wants to get an idea of what is being done for the language in the schools and the pride which the children are taking in the language, to go down to Scoil Mhuire, which is under the control of Miss Ashe, a sister of the late Thomas Ashe. I was going down there some time ago while the children were at play. I heard the children speaking Irish and, naturally, I was interested and I spoke to them. Their intelligent little faces lit up with delight when they found a person of my years could converse with them in the national language. That is altogether a different picture from that given to us by Senator Baxter. I have spoken to the children all over the city and I have always found them delighted when the language was spoken to them, and, in my opinion, the greatest credit is due to the teachers who are teaching those children for the headway they are making in the City of Dublin in the matter of the language. How did Canon O'Leary, Father Dineen, Dr. Hyde, or any of those who kept the language alive learn the language? They had to study it without either the radio or the films. My opinion is that it is the national spirit of the people that will revive and extend the language.

It was the spirit of the national writings of the centenary movement of '98, after the disastrous Parnell split, when the national spirit was recreated, that made the national movement possible. Out of the national movement grew the Sinn Féin movement and the Republican movement, because there was an excellent national brotherly and sisterly spirit in the Gaelic League movement of those days, and because there was a complete absence of the distrust we see around us at the present time.

I do not believe that any help for the teaching of the language is going to come from broadcasting or the films. I am not one of those who find fault with other suggestions and refuse to put forward any suggestions myself. I think that there should be some place of amusement for young people after they have left school in which they would be compelled to use the Irish language and the Irish language only. When we were teaching our Gaelic League classes there was usually half an hour given for social functions after the language classes had concluded. The language classes were held from 8 o'clock to 9.30 p.m. and then there was half an hour until 10 o'clock for social intercourse. We found that it attracted a great number of people who might not have been anxious to attend the classes, but we insisted that they should attend the classes before being admitted to the social functions.

There must be an outlet for youthful physical energy and if we could have social functions, such as ceilidhes and dances, at which they would be compelled to speak Irish, I think much more would be done for the language than would be done by broadcasting or films. There are also such functions as whist drives and bridge drives and it would be no harm if our friends used the language at those functions. I have met at whist drives a member of the reporting staff of one of our city newspapers. He usually speaks to me in Irish with a fine northern accent and our conversations have aroused curiosity in the minds of some people. It rather reminds me of the early days of the movement, when we were looked upon as foreigners when we spoke the language in the city. The other night in Banba Hall, this reporter from one of the city newspapers and I were speaking in Irish and a lady nearby was intelligent enough to describe us as two Germans, even with the headway the language is now making.

There is no fear, in my opinion, for the language now that we have a sympathetic Government in power. In the days I speak of we had a hostile Government in power. We have now a sympathetic Government and I do not at all mean to decry the efforts of Senator Blythe for the movement when he was in office. I give him all the credit in the world for it. The President and Vice-President and other members of the Ministry were active workers in the language movement when it was not fashionable to be in it and are Irish speakers themselves, and we also have the position that a knowledge of the language is one of the qualifications required of persons seeking public appointments. The cry against the language in the past was: "It is not a commercial language and has no commercial value." But the very people who then decried the language are now the first to come to us to ask where they should send their children to get a knowledge of the language so that they may be able to get positions in the public service of the State or municipalities. I move that this matter be postponed for six months. I do not know whether anybody will second that amendment.

Cathaoirleach

I am afraid I cannot allow you to move that, Senator.

Donnchadha O hEaluighthe

I can continue to speak against the motion before us then. At last Saturday night's meeting of the Coiste Gnotha of the Gaelic League, there was a communication from the new Director of the Broadcasting Station and a subcommittee of the Coiste Gnotha was appointed to interview him. That shows that the new director is not neglectful of the interest that may be aroused in regard to the use of broadcasting on behalf of the language. I suggest that at the end of the six months I have in mind, we would know whether the new director was giving satisfaction to Senator Blythe and others. We had a motion here recently by Senator Baxter deploring the programmes from the Broadcasting Station. Senator Baxter was evidently not satisfied with those programmes. Does he think that the people in whom he was interested will be catered for by giving more time to the language movement? Senator Baxter himself may be an Irish speaker, but in the short time I have been here, I have never heard anybody from his side speak the language. Does he think that the use of Irish from the Broadcasting Station will make it more attractive to those in whom he was interested and on whose behalf he was dissatisfied? I doubt it very much, and because the present director is in consultation with the Coiste Gnotha of the Gaelic League, I suggest that this matter be postponed until we find out whether the programmes sent out from the station are satisfactory to Senator Blythe and to those for whom he is speaking.

I do not think I need delay the House any longer. I am sorry I was not here for Senator O Maille's opening remarks. I have known him in the movement for years and I was anxious to hear what he might have to say, but I was unfortunately delayed. I am the only dissentient in this and I am sorry to be so, but I understand this question. I have been through the language movement and I do not think anybody in Dublin, since 1898, gave more active service to it than I did. I am conversant with the difficulties of the matter and I hold the view that no good will come to the teaching of the language from broadcasting or films.

Mr. Blythe

I appreciate that the progress to which Senator Healy refers is taking place and that the changes which he mentioned, and which are very important, have actually occurred. I think that Senator Colonel Moore came nearer to the heart of the matter when he said that the very great work that has been done up to the present has been largely propagandist work, and that it is only now we are coming to the real difficulties of the problem of preserving and restoring the national language.

Now, while all the change that Senator Healy mentions has taken place during the period that he referred to, I think it is undoubted also that during that period the strength of the Irish language, taking the country as a whole, has fallen very seriously indeed. The census figures alone show that, and the decay in the Gaeltacht and in the Breac-Ghaeltacht has not been compensated for by the progress that has been made in Dublin and elsewhere. My belief is that, unless we look upon what has been done as a stepping stone to enable us to do more, the loss that has taken place, and must continue to take place for some time, cannot be made up. I am quite clear that the Irish language can be saved, but if we were to just go on as we have been going, not taking advantage of the opportunities that inventions like the pictures and broadcasting give us, and if we were to fail also to face up to the new difficulties that these things create, then I believe that the movement would ultimately fail. It would be quite possible to have a good deal of progress in the schools, to have a good smattering of Irish acquired by almost everyone in the country, and still have the language fade out as, at one time, Latin faded out in the countries where it was still the language of education. I think that it is absolutely necessary to use all the means at our disposal to do the work we have undertaken. As I have already said, these mechanical inventions create new difficulties and new necessities, and if we do not use them then they will be used against us.

Senator Healy talked about the difficulty of teaching Irish through broadcasting. In my opinion no attempt should be made to teach Irish through broadcasting. If I had my way there would be no such thing as an Irish lesson broadcast, but what I would like to do is to give lectures, songs and plays to the people in Irish through broadcasting. I think that is the proper way to use it; to get stuff that will be of interest, and not too much of it. I do not want to annoy unduly people in the community who have not Irish because, after all, it is only on their support or with their acquiescence that the language movement can go ahead. But I think we ought to give to the people who have Irish a fair quantity of interesting matter. I believe that the director of broadcasting appreciates the need for this. There will be all sorts of difficulties and I think that the appointment of a commission on which there were a number of interested people who would examine all those difficulties, who would be able to make many more suggestions than have been made here, would be a help to him. For instance, I can conceive it as quite possible that if there was no commission to support him the new director might find difficulties on the question of finance. It would be a natural enough thing that he should experience those difficulties, and if the question of the expenditure that was necessary was thrashed out by the members of the commission his task would be made very much easier.

The Minister for Lands, when speaking here on the motion, adverted somewhat to this question of cost. I appreciate that you cannot just now, or in fact at any time, lightly rush into considerable expenditure. Personally, I have always been in favour of doing what was necessary to be done for Irish at the least possible cost so as to give no ground for justifiable complaint by those who were not interested. I should like to say that I do not agree with Senator Comyn that great sums have been spent on Irish. There has been a certain amount of expenditure, but I do not think that that expenditure can be described as the expenditure of great sums. There has been a great deal of effort on the part of the teachers. For the ordinary salaries they receive, they are required to make considerable efforts in teaching Irish in the schools and unless you segregate the amount of time which they spend teaching Irish, and calculate what that is worth, you cannot say that great sums have been spent in teaching Irish. If one did proceed to do that, then one could say that considerably more time, and consequently money, had been spent restoring and preserving English.

Senator Connolly raised the question of cost. I do not think that there is any use expecting the present Director of Broadcasting to give us satisfactory Irish programmes if he can only spend £500 or more a year on them. I may be wrong in my estimate, but I have been thinking over the matter since Senator Connolly put the question. My own belief is that the director would need to spend about £7,000 a year to get a satisfactory Irish programme week after week, and to do the work we have been talking about here. I do not believe, however, that that would be any burthen to the Exchequer, because the income of the broadcasting station has been rising. I believe if we do what I have suggested it will rise more rapidly. It seems to me that what keeps the income of the service low is that there is a considerable amount of evasion. One of the reasons why I believe the evasion has been so widespread is that people have felt that they were not getting value from the station here: that they were getting nothing, practically, that they would not get from stations on the other side. Considering the amount of money that is being spent on sending children to the Gaeltacht, as well as on visits by grown-ups to it, I believe myself that suitable programmes in Irish would be appreciated by very considerable numbers of people, and that they would create an atmosphere that would lessen, to some extent, the evasion. Apart from that, I believe that a broadcast for schools would lead to the installation of reception sets in many homes where they do not exist at the moment, owing to the influence of the children. If £7,000 a year were spent on Gaelic programmes I do not think that the Exchequer would be out anything. I have already mentioned that the thing is full of difficulties. I am still arguing that it is not good enough to leave it to the new director. There are a hundred things that have to be thought of. Take the question I have mentioned already of songs. Songs are broadcast from the English stations. They have songs galore to choose from, and new songs are being written constantly. There is no difficulty in the matter of choice. The trouble here has been that we are simply ringing the changes on old songs, and I think it is absolutely necessary that the station here, in the matter of Irish songs, should go beyond what the station in Great Britain does that it should deliberately set out to get new songs.

Somebody may say that you cannot order songs in the way you can order a pair of boots, and that nothing can be done in that matter. I was personally struck by this that, after I spoke here on the motion I got a letter from a young man who had written a number of songs in Irish. One of them was a marching song in Irish for Mr. Aiken's new Volunteer Force. He had written songs in Irish and he was trying to get musicians here to set tunes to them. The words of the songs seemed to me to be perfectly good and suitable for the purpose. Here, at least, was one man who had the idea of producing what we have a need for —new songs in Irish. I believe that if the Station welcomed such things and paid a reasonable price for them, by way of encouragement and maintenance, they could get them.

There may be a dozen ways in which a problem of this kind could be tackled that one individual would not think of. They would only arise out of a considerable amount of examination. Plays and lectures and so on present problems of very considerable difficulty. I believe that nothing can be done here to improve broadcasting, so far as Irish is concerned, by sitting down and waiting for offers from people who wish to be engaged. We have got to go out and look for talent, and in a variety of ways to encourage people to write, to study and prepare. Otherwise we will only have the sort of programmes in Irish which we have been having up to the present, programmes which are so dreary, so uninteresting and so undistinguished that they will do no good at all for the language, and will only be listened to by persons who may be preparing for an examination or something like that. I do not believe that there is any good in thinking that the Irish language can live as a penitential language. It can only live if people do the things in which they have a pleasureable interest.

I think that even more important than the question of broadcasting or an extra supply of books is the need for a weekly publication such as I referred to in my opening statement, because there are many people who will not read books and at present, except in a very small and specialised form, there is nothing from week to week that the person who knows Irish can get to read. I believe that if the Irish language is to prosper, if the books that are to be published are to be properly reviewed and to have interest aroused in them, to have an atmosphere for their reception prepared, there must be some sort of a big weekly publication in Irish of general interest. It might be put in charge of the Department of Education or of some governmental commission outside.

Senator O Máille referred to the question of terminology for dealing with modern matters in Irish. I think the development of Irish went on a little longer than Senator Comyn said, but at a certain point the development of the Irish language stopped. It became a sort of country farmer's and fisherman's language. It ceased to be the language of people who were interested in matters of art or intellect or literature or of any sort of urban occupation even. Then, of course, it has not a modern terminology except in so far as that was developed by the Gaelic League. I think that modern terminology can only be developed and put into use by some sort of weekly publication that will deal with everything. On the last day that the motion was discussed here I jotted down a list of the things on which we might have articles in Irish. It included sport, racing, football, golf, swimming, fishing, contract bridge, chess, articles on motor gadgets, wireless apparatus, television, photography, film news; articles on gardening, financial news, hints to investors and then, of course, ordinary news such as murders, court trials, breach of promise cases, and so on. I remember that when I visited Aberystwyth I bought a newspaper published in the Welsh language. I read reports in it of all the day's news. If we could ever have anything like that newspaper in Irish it would be a very good thing for the Irish language. For instance, there was a splendid double murder, beginning with adultery and ending up with suicide. That paper gave all the local news in the Welsh language.

Mr. Johnson

It was racy of the soil.

Mr. Blythe

It carried all the news of the day in Welsh. It had great headlines, and the news published in it was such that any Welsh-speaking person would be delighted to read it with great avidity without any question of being morbid and going to the ends of the earth looking for sensations. It had all the local news, reporting the things in which the people there were interested. When occurrences such as I saw reported in that newspaper take place at our own doors it is only hypocrisy to pretend that we are not all interested in reading the reports of them.

I should like to see Parliamentary and foreign news in Irish. I should like to see stories in Irish about new inventions and scientific discoveries. I should like to see the latest news about the electron and eclipses of the sun in Irish. I should like to have farming notes in Irish, dealing with the feeding of cattle and the use of new manures. I should like to have original fiction and poems. The Irish language cannot be preserved as a country language or as a mere fireside language. I think there is no hope of that. It can only be preserved if all the work of the ordinary citizen can be easily done in it. At present, there are difficulties in the way of even the person who knows Irish well when he attempts to do his work in the language. Take the case of a couple of persons who are members of the Gaelic League in Dublin and who go out to play golf. It is very doubtful whether they know the names of the clubs in Irish. It would, of course, be easy enough to devise Irish names for them. But the ordinary man will not know the small number of technical terms used in playing golf.

Mr. Douglas

The language is not picturesque enough.

Mr. Blythe

Something in the nature of a weekly publication containing all matters I have described is necessary. A publication of that kind might cost £10,000 a year at the beginning. There would be no use in having the work done on a niggardly scale. The cost will tend to go down. In the Gúm, if a staff of translators were employed to translate technical and difficult works into Irish—work corresponding to the translation of the statutes—it would cost £2,000 or £3,000 a year, but I think that it is necessary to do that. Senator O Máille spoke rather against translations. The point has been dealt with by other speakers. Anybody who can do original work in Irish that is worth publication ought to be encouraged. He ought to be paid for his work and it ought to be published. There are, however, a great many people who have a good command of Irish and English and, perhaps, another language who could do excellent translations into Irish but yet who could not create characters or tell an original story in a way that would render it worthy of publication. Anybody who has seen work submitted for publication knows that what I say is true. People may write excellent Irish, yet a novel or play written by them would not be worth consideration. Many of these people could probably produce excellent translations. Then there are all sorts of work which require expert knowledge. If a man has not that expert knowledge, he cannot hope to produce a good work in Irish. He may, however, know sufficient about the subject to enable him to do a good translation into Irish. While I am all for original work, so far as it can be obtained, I think we must depend mainly on translation. These are points upon which there will be great differences of view.

Replying, as it were, to the Minister for Lands and leaving out the question of pictures for the moment, I believe that the cost of the things I want done would not run to more than £25,000 per annum or thereabouts.

With regard to pictures, my notion is that only a very modest beginning should be made. Anything in the way of the production of talking pictures in Irish must be experimental. The Minister for Lands pointed out how difficult it would be to compete with the big corporations which spend £100,000 on a single picture. I do not think we should attempt to compete with that sort of picture. To take a parallel, the type of dramatic work that has been done in the Abbey Theatre has been regarded throughout the world as the best of its class. Yet, that theatre could never have competed with the institutions which put on big revues and expensive shows which are popular wherever shown but which are of a different order. I do not think there can be any question of producing talking pictures in Irish dealing with medieval history or the type of play that requires a great cast or expensive scenery. On the other hand, there are types of simple comedy and domestic drama which, if put on by an artist of quality, might be regarded as, in their own way, equal to anything that could be done. I am not even suggesting that we should begin by trying that type of production. I am suggesting that a beginning should be made with pictures for the schools which would brighten the teaching of Irish and would relieve the position of the children who, in many places, are dependent on the voice of a single teacher for the learning of Irish. You can never hope to get good results if all the Irish that the ordinary child hears is from one teacher. If you want the language to become part of his mind, he must hear it from various sources, with various kinds of expression and with variety of intonation and vocabulary. Apart from what might be done by broadcasting, if suitable pictures could be made for the schools, they would be of considerable value and, from those simple pictures, we might pass on to more difficult things.

The Minister for Lands did not say whether the Government would agree to the setting up of a commission or not. I hope they will. I believe that there are many things which, instead of being delayed, as Senator Healy seems to think, would be hastened by the establishment of a commission. A commission would, I think, be the means of overcoming obstacles. Agreement would be reached, as a result of the proper kind of discussion, on matters about which there is a great deal of disagreement at present. I am perfectly satisfied that there is no use in continuing to carry out the schools programme we have at present unless we supplement it in this way or in some other way. What I think will occur if no change is made is: we shall spread a smattering of Irish but we shall not spread a command of Irish. We shall not preserve it where it exists at the present time and we shall not cause it to take root anywhere else.

Senator Baxter referred to libraries. Somebody told me of a branch library in a country place in which there were 5,000 books. That is not a big library, but if you had a library in Irish you would have only 300 or 400 books. There is no choice of reading matter for anybody in Irish. If you look into any book shop in town you will see books dealing with scores of different subjects about which there is not a single word written in Irish. Leaving out a certain number of novels, a certain amount of folklore, a couple of books about the French Revolution, and one or two biographies, a couple of volumes of sermons and one or two lives of saints, there is nothing at all in Irish. If a person is interested in the situation in Russia or in economics, he cannot get a word about the subject in Irish. If a person is interested in the history of America or in American conditions, he cannot find anything written in Irish on these matters. If he is interested in the motor car, in aviation or in television or any of the other things in which people take an interest at present, there is not a word available to him in Irish. There are a few prayer books in Irish, but there is not even a missal printed in Irish. We have a number of country sermons, and we have Father Benedict's translation of the Biography of the Little Flower. But even on religious topics there is really no reading matter in Irish and, in my view, unless something big is done in this way, the whole work of the schools is bound to be wasted. There are hundreds of difficulties in the way of speeding up things. When I was in office, I made attempts to speed up the work in the Gúm. Sometimes the delay was blamed on the translators. Their work was supposed to be bad and to require correction. The translators put the blame on the editors, and both put the blame on the printers. I remember, when one great hold up occurred, it was stated that nearly all the proofreaders had gone on to the staff of the Irish Press, which had just then been started. We were told that there was going to be a hold up for months because other proof readers could not be obtained. Every time I made an attempt to speed up things, I found that there was a complication of difficulties. These are matters which might be inquired into by the commission which I propose. Whatever the difficulties, they must be overcome. If we do not overcome them, and if we do not put aside this objection to translation, which seems to be one of the causes of delay, we might as well give up the whole effort to save the Irish language.

I hope that the Seanad will accept the motion, and that the Government will set up a commission with the terms of reference indicated, or with wider terms of reference, or with entirely different terms of reference. In any event, I hope that they will set up this commission, because they are dealing with a matter that is very difficult and complicated. I do not at all agree with Senator Healy that commissions mean delay.

Mr. Johnson

That is only the case when they are appointed on the initiative of the Government.

Mr. Healy

That is the history of commissions.

Mr. Blythe

I agree that many of them did that.

Question put and declared carried.