On Friday last, when speaking on this Bill, I think I was referring to the fact that so far as the restoration of the Irish language was concerned, time and time alone would be the only thing that would restore it. Certainly this Bill will not suffice. According to Section 5, no person is to be admitted a solicitor by the Chief Justice unless, before such admission, the Chief Justice is satisfied that such a person possesses a competent knowledge of the Irish language. Naturally, it may be assumed that a person who has a competent knowledge of Irish will be able to conduct his cases in the courts wholly in Irish. Unless future solicitors have a real, competent knowledge of the language, such as will enable them to present their cases to the court in that language, the Bill will not achieve its object. Assuming for the moment that solicitors will have this competent knowledge of the language, there is no provision in the Bill to ensure that the judges hearing any particular case will have a competent knowledge of Irish, so that we will then have the extraordinary position of a solicitor presenting his case in a language that is not understood by the judge. It is provided in this Bill that the Chief Justice is to be the sole judge as to whether persons qualifying for the legal profession have a competent knowledge of Irish, but there is no provision in the Bill to ensure that the Chief Justice himself will have a competent knowledge of Irish. Taking the Bill as a whole, I believe, as I said in the beginning, that all this is a waste of time and an unnecessary expenditure of money that could be more usefully employed. When one considers the present economic condition of the country, the numbers of people out of employment and the thousands of families in need of good housing accommodation, I think that it will be agreed that the Government should be slow in spending public money unnecessarily on the restoration of the Irish language. I think it would be in the interests of the language not to bring in a Bill of this nature at all. I think, as I said before, it is a question more or less of running with the hare and hunting with the hounds at one and the same time. I believe in calling a spade a spade. It is better to be honest and entrust the work of the restoration of the Irish language to those people who, by virtue of their position, are the only people who can restore it. I was rather surprised to hear one of the chief Opposition Deputies declare that the expenditure of half a million of money was not very much on the restoration of the language. I fail to see when we in this country became so rich that we can afford to spend half a million of money and yet consider it very little.
PRIVATE DEPUTIES' BUSINESS. - LEGAL PRACTITIONERS (QUALIFICATION) BILL, 1928—SECOND STAGE (RESUMED).
If the Deputy would permit me to interrupt him for a moment, I know that the figure of half a million has been bandied around, but as a fact the annual amount that is being spent on the restoration of the Irish language is much more like one-tenth of that sum.
I am very glad to hear that, but I was only quoting what had been stated in the House. I would be surprised if it were a fact that half a million was being expended. It may be the opinion of Deputies opposite that that sum should be expended, but it is not my opinion, for the simple reason that we cannot afford it. We cannot afford to expend any considerable sum of money on the restoration of the Irish language. Not that I am against the restoration of the language, but I want to see first the economic position of the country improved. I want, if possible, to see an increase in the employment given, and a good housing Bill introduced into this House, as well as the carrying out of other works that are very necessary at the moment. I am opposing this Bill because I believe that in the long run it will defeat the object aimed at. There is no doubt that, notwithstanding the fact that at the present time we are entrusted with the government of our own affairs, the spirit of nationality seems to be less evident to-day than it was ten or fifteen years ago. Now I ascribe all that to the policy of compelling people to do what they are not prepared to do; in fact, compelling them to do what they will do without compulsion, and what they are prepared to do. For these reasons, I oppose the Bill, because I believe it would be much wiser in the interests of the language itself if such a measure as this had not been introduced. I think it would have been much better if instead of introducing this Bill Deputy Conlan, or the Government itself, had consulted the Incorporated Law Society and let that society know what the intention was. In that way some form of agreement could be come to that would have obviated the necessity for introducing this Bill at this particular time. For those reasons I am opposing the Bill, although I am convinced that it will be passed by a majority.
I have great pleasure in supporting this Bill. I think it meets a long-felt want. Irish is the national language of this country, and the Bill is approved of by the Deputies of this House, with the exception of a few who may be relegated to the category of cranks. They pretend to be supporters of the language, but at the same time they will not support this Bill. Because Deputy Conlon, an ordinary Deputy on this side of the House, introduced the Bill, is no reason why reflections should be cast upon his enthusiasm. Irish being the national language, there is no reason for complaint if every profession and every member of the community are asked to be proficient in the language, and that members of the legal profession should be able to state the case for their clients in that language when the necessity arises. As to the suggestion that the study of Irish is a hindrance to children in the study of other subjects, it is the universal experience that children who have been taught through the medium of Irish have been very successful. In schools where they teach through the medium of Irish there is evidence to prove that their pupils top the lists in the Intermediate examinations.
Many excuses are offered by children to their parents when they have not succeeded in passing an examination. They may say it is the fault of the Irish, but if you challenge those children on that particular statement and put them tests in mathematics, English, geography or history, you will find them deficient in all these subjects. On the other hand, take the children who have been in earnest in the study of the Irish language and you will find those children most proficient in other subjects. The study of the language broadens the minds of the children and raises the general standard of their education. I think it was Deputy Professor Thrift who said that the results in recent examinations were not up to the standard of other years. I do not think that is altogether correct. The fact is that the standard set for the Intermediate and Matriculation examinations is too high in every subject, and that may be a reason why the children did not come up to the standard the Deputy expected. I do not believe in Deputies stating here that the majority of the people in the country are dead against the Irish language. When I was going forward in the last elections I said in the Midlands that I would support the Irish language to the best of my ability on every occasion, and it is my intention to do that. The people knew that I meant what I said, and I am doing it.
What I object to is a Deputy making the statement that he is in favour of the Irish language but that he does not like compulsion. Such a person, in my opinion, is really more deadly opposed to the language than the man who opposes it outright. I regard all Deputies in this House as good Irishmen, but they should certainly give the language the help to which it is entitled. I do not think that before he introduced the Bill there was any necessity for Deputy Conlon to have consulted the legal profession. It is the duty of this House to introduce Bills for what it thinks is right and proper and good for the country. It would be a strange thing if we established that principle of consultation. At some future date it would be asked:"Why did not the Minister for Justice go out and consult the licensed trade as to what should be the hours of business in licensed premises," and so on. You can apply the same thing to every Minister and tell him that if he wants to introduce a measure he must first consult the particular class concerned.
If we were to say for a moment, for the sake of argument, that the Minister for Finance was to go and consult his friends in the country as to how they would like their income tax collected, I think he would find himself in a very difficult position. Therefore I hope this Bill will receive the full measure of support that it is entitled to receive.
In rising to speak on this Bill, I must in the first place admit that it is far easier to speak in support of it, because there are a great many platitudes and other things that could be said. I must say that I am very interested in this debate. I confess that it is the first real Irish debate I have listened to. I have followed with as much interest as I am capable the different views put forward, first those of Deputy Conlon and Deputy McFadden, and then the views of the different Parties. I suppose at this stage one should try to point out that one ought to feel squashed by the storm of eloquence brought forth in support of the Bill. Very lurid pictures have been painted of some people standing like inquisitors with flaming swords ready to slay those who speak against Irish. I cannot see that view-point. On looking over the speeches I noticed the remarkable thing that no speaker up to the present has stated that Irish should not be taught in the country. Therefor I hold that the whole thing ranges round the means by which Irish may be introduced as the national language. It may be necessary to state one's position. We are in a free State, and thought is free, and if one honestly believes that no material benefit can come out of a particular Bill surely one has the right, as the representative of the people, to say so.
Coming to the Bill itself, I have the greatest regard for its sponsors, Deputy McFadden especially. I consider him to be a very good friend of mine, and we have had a good many interests in common. But considering the Bill, I think Deputy Redmond was the first to analyse the speeches that Deputies made in support of it. To my mind he analysed them very well when he said that there were just two points made in support of the Bill, the first being that it was part of the national policy to introduce the language, and the second that necessity existed in some parts of the Free State for the conduct of legal business in Irish. Strange to say, from all the speeches we have heard in support of the Bill these arguments have neither been supported nor supplemented. To my mind, the statement that it is part of the national policy is no argument at all. Why should it be part of the national policy suddenly to make it obligatory for entrance to the study of the law to have a competent knowledge of the Irish language?
Why should such precipitate action be taken? No single argument on its own merits has been put forward as to why this particular Bill should be passed. I do not want to confuse the issue—that the Irish language should form part of the national policy. If I may use an illustration: in the great war when Germany invaded the neutral country of Belgium it was not thought a very convincing argument, when asked why they swept such constitutional obligations aside and treated them as scraps of paper, when they said it was part of the national policy that they were to make for Paris. Surely a Bill that cuts so precipitately across the national order of a respected institution should have some material reason to support it. I have listened to the speeches and read the reports in vain to find a reason. As to the second point, that there is a general demand for the Bill, will any Deputy get up and say truthfully that his constituents are clamouring for it, and that they are impeded and cannot get law enough in the other tongue? Are they clamouring as they are for drainage, housing, sanitation, employment, and old age pensions, I am told. I move about the country a good deal and I have never heard this complaint. Has the legal profession demanded this Bill? We were told quite frankly that they were not consulted, and that they will not be consulted. What would we say if the Minister for Agriculture came into this House and introduced a measure, and when he was asked about it, if he said that he had neither consulted the farming community nor anyone else. I am afraid that from all the benches in this House there would be strong words used. What our people are asking for to-day is the means and the opportunity to improve themselves socially and economically, and they are quite content to leave the artistic and ornamental until times have improved.
A DEPUTY
Too late.
Too late, my friend says. What is five or ten years in the life of a nation? This Bill prescribes for all who were sixteen years of age on the 1st of January last entering for the study of law, and for the practice of law, that they must possess a competent knowledge of Irish. I take that to mean to be able to read, write, think and speak it, and not merely an elementary knowledge. Is not that premature at least by from five to ten years? It is only four years ago or so since the serious study of it began. A boy who was then twelve years old may likely enough have been taught by a teacher who was only a learner himself. Can he, in addition to learning the other essential subjects, be possessed of a competent knowledge of Irish? I think it is perfectly impossible that he could speak with the eloquence of Deputy Fahy, Deputy Derrig, or Deputy Mongan. Up to this point I know that I will be described, as some of the rest of my friends have been described, as a West Briton for speaking in this manner. I think too much has been made of that side of the question in support of the Bill. Why should we not deal with the Bill itself? As a great many people have put it to me, why should we not face our own questions in the light of our own experience? It will not help us if we put forward as a reason that another country has a certain sentiment and that we want to oppose that sentiment. I think that we should address ourselves more particularly in a commonsense way to questions that come before us and leave outside matters to one side. I flatter myself that I try to see the other person's viewpoint when it is sincere, and I respect it.
For instance, I can see the viewpoint of the Minister for Education when in the propagation of the language he begins with the child. I can see his viewpoint there.
A DEPUTY
And you opposed his viewpoint.
I am speaking of the Minister for Education and his policy. I am illustrating my remarks by saying that I can see his viewpoint in that perfectly well, and I will tell the Deputy in a minute how I oppose it. The Minister begins with the child that starts going to school at four, five or six, when the child will acquire the language more naturally than if he started to learn it later. But this Bill, as far as I can see, starts with a person who may have only begun to learn Irish when he was twelve or thirteen years of age, and inside three or four years he is asked to have a competent knowledge—not the sort of knowledge that may do for a great many positions in the State at present, but a really useful knowledge. I have never made any secret of my opposition to the compulsory side of the Minister's policy, because I believe—and it is my own experience—that children learn best what they like to learn. The Deputy said that I opposed the policy of the Minister for Education, and I suppose he considers I am hostile to it. I come from a district where portion of the Minister's policy could have been made ineffective—the clause in his Education Bill which provided that if the majority of the parents of a particular school wished, they could opt out from the learning of Irish by making application to the Minister. As some Deputies know quite well, that policy could easily have been carried out, but in my district not a single school exercised that right to opt out. If I were to deal with my own experience I might point out that, without very much inconvenience, I could have sent my own children to school across the Border where there is no Irish, but I did not do so; they are at a Free State school and are learning Irish, so that I think the Deputy's point does not carry much weight. I have stated what is a bare fact, and I will leave it there. Perhaps it is going outside the scope of the Bill, but a matter that has been referred to by a good many Deputies in this debate is the place that Irish takes in the ordinary curriculum of the day schools. We could with advantage do with less, and we would accomplish in the end perhaps the desire of the greatest enthusiasts for the language. But if Deputies would take what we have in our districts—a number of small farmers and labourers whose children have no other opportunity of gaining an education except what they get at the national schools—if a census were taken of these. I venture to say that the last speaker would find that these people would give expression to their views in a surprising way.
I might be permitted to make a remark or two on some of the points raised by some Deputies. Deputy Brennan said that the teaching of Irish in the national schools has not proven to be detrimental to the general education of the child. In support of that he referred to the scholarship examinations in County Roscommon, which showed that those who are proficient in Irish were also proficient in other subjects. I think it was evident to every Deputy when Deputy Brennan was speaking that that was no comparison at all, because it was a comparison between pupils who were learning the same thing. It might not be right to draw comparisons with Northern Ireland, but take Scotland. Will you find that the average child in the Free State has the same standard of education as the average Scottish child? Deputy Carney said that there was a demand for this, and he drew a very pathetic picture of the old grandfather and grandmother, the father and mother, and then the child. The old people could speak nothing but Irish, the middle couple could speak both, and the child could speak English. I fail to see where the point was, because if anybody was to blame it would probably be the father and mother, so that there was no point whatever in that. Then we had very great eloquence from Deputy Mullins, who dealt very strongly with those who opposed the Bill, but in spite of all his eloquence, which I admired, I felt that his argument was very crude. He said that one Deputy who had spoken against it had revealed a slave mind, and yet, practically following on that sentence he said—these may not be the exact words, but they represent the spirit of it—"Let those who are opposed to this Bill take note that if they continue they will be dealt with." I speak for myself, and I am not one who is afraid to be dealt with by the law of the land. I have been a law-abiding citizen, and I am quite content to let the law of the land operate. Surely, the law of the land cannot operate against a person for what he says or thinks about a particular subject. Deputy O'Hanlon made what I think, though he is a Northern man, was a curious shot at those who had the temerity to speak against the Bill. He said that those who spoke against it to-day would take very good care that they knew the language before very long in order to qualify for positions. I would ask Deputy O'Hanlon not to be raising false hopes in our bosoms.
He was thinking of the Land League.
We are always glad to see enthusiasm in worthy causes. We are glad to see Irishmen enthusiastic about Irish questions and about improving the social and economic conditions of the country, but in regard to these matters I feel that we should consider them on their own merits. There is one point in the Bill which I think should not be lost sight of, and which, if it is to pass, which I am sure it will, will need amending, and that is the provision which puts it into the hands of one man to say who is to be admitted into this profession. I think we have too much legislation leaving it to one man, or to a body of men, to decide a matter of opinion. If we are here as representatives of the people we should be able to find such words, either in the English or the Irish language, as would describe what we want, and not leave it as a matter of opinion.
It gives me great pleasure to rise to support this Bill, and the knowledge that this Bill is to become law, or has every prospect of becoming law, is, to me at any rate, a matter of great satisfaction. We must have a certain amount of admiration for the gallant fight that is being put up by, I suppose, what we must still call the Unionist Party in this country. They certainly are fighting for the last trench with a determination that is at least to be admired, though we cannot agree with it. It is not to me a bit surprising, knowing the mentality of that particular section fairly well, that they should adopt the attitude towards the national language that they have adopted in this debate. It is nothing new to find that particular class opposed to anything Irish. They do not like anything Irish. They never did. They represent the people who sent them here, because the people who sent them here do not like our language, our customs, our distinctive national culture—or in fact they do not like anything Irish about us. That is about the sum and substance of their opposition. We cannot expect them to change, or at least to change suddenly. Deputy Cooper in particular is strongly opposed to this Bill. In the course of his remarks on the 19th October he said:—
"If there had been any discussion with the governing bodies of the legal profession, at least with the Bar, one fact would have arisen very early in the debate, and that is the fact that there are reciprocal arrangements between the Irish Inns of Court and the Inns of Court in London. Members of either Bar, by complying with certain formalities laid down by the Benchers of that Bar, can be admitted to the other Bar. No examination is necessary. This, as I say, is a reciprocal arrangement. It has been used very much more by members of the Irish Bar, who have taken up a practice in England, than members of the English Bar who have come to this country."
So far as my information on that particular aspect of it goes, it has been almost entirely used by members of the Irish Bar who go across to practise in England. I do not think that Deputy Cooper will ask us to believe that members of the Irish Bar in future, if this Bill becomes law, will not be allowed to practise in England because they know Irish, because that is what it amounts to. Bad as they are in England, I do not think they will prevent Irish barristers from practising at the English Bar for the reason that, no matter what other qualifications they have, they had the audacity to learn their national language. Later on Deputy Cooper referred to another aspect of the situation. He said, as reported in column 715 of the Official Report:—
"Take the position of a solicitor who intends to have his son join him, first as a partner and then as his successor. The son may now be sixteen years of age, but he was not sixteen on the 1st January. He may be at a school where Irish is not taught. There is one such school, a school which has sent very many distinguished men to the Bar and to the solicitors' profession. It is situated, just across the Border, in Northern Ireland. Deputy Haslett will know it. They may teach Irish in that school; I do not think they do, and they are certainly not obliged to do so. It would be a great hardship if such a boy would have to break his school career and have to go to another school where he would be two years older than the other new boys, and where he would have to acquaint himself with a different system of instruction and adjust himself to an entirely new atmosphere."
I cannot see that any real hardship is going to be inflicted on anybody in this particular regard. If anybody living in this part of Ireland wants to send his son to a school of law in Northern Ireland and if that school wants to cater for the sons of the people who want to be educated there, I think it is their own business; if that school wishes to teach the national language so as to cater for the sons of solicitors who may prefer the atmosphere in such a school to the atmosphere which does exist in the Saorstát, then it is a matter for that school to teach the national language. Deputy Cooper laments that these students must adjust themselves to an entirely new atmosphere. The poor fellows! We have great sympathy with them on their coming into a Gaelic atmosphere where they would have to associate with Irish Irelanders and Gaelic Leaguers. They might lose their carefully acquired accents. That is an aspect of the matter that should not be introduced into this House at all. If these people wish to live in this country and to enjoy the rights of citizenship, to which they are welcome, the least they should do is to adapt themselves to and fall into line at any rate with our national aspirations, at least in some regard to fall into line in the matter of the national language. Deputy Redmond during the debate wanted to know why Irish is not made compulsory and applied to the other professions; why is it not made essential for membership of this House. There is a certain amount of logic in that argument. I for one hope that the time will come in the near future when a knowledge of the national language will be an essential test for membership of this House. I think it would be more in keeping with the spirit of the nation and more in keeping with our national traditions that such a test should be applied than that we should be asked to take an oath of allegiance to a foreign king. That would be my reading of it, and I do not think it would be so very revolutionary at all if we were obliged to have a competent knowledge of Irish in this House.
Then the question was asked about the medical profession, and why this test is not applied to the medical profession. The Deputy seems to forget that a long number of years ago Irish was made an essential subject for admission to the National University. He seems to forget that any doctor who qualified at the National University in recent years had to have a knowledge of the Irish language. It is true that in Trinity College and the College of Surgeons the Irish language has not been made compulsory. Perhaps the authorities of these institutions will now take the hint, and perhaps as a result of this debate Irish will be made an essential subject by Trinity College and the College of Surgeons.
Deputy Cole has a lot to say on this subject. There is only one aspect of his contribution to the debate that I wish to deal with. He said it is a matter of placing another brick on the already troublesome Border question, and he asked is it a matter of trying to drive our children to other centres across the Border. That brings us back to the old question. If we have to abandon our National language, and if we have to abandon our National customs, traditions and pastimes, if we have to abandon everything Irish in order to get what Deputy Cole aimed at, well then we are not going to have unity at that price, and it is time that that line of discussion were dropped. We had that kind of unity before. We had an united Ireland before on these conditions; and I presume, judging by the statements made by responsible men in the North of Ireland and in the Six County Assembly, if we conceded that much and became good West British children, the next thing they would ask from us is to adopt as our national anthem "Dolly's Brae" or "Kick the Pope." We are not going to do it. The price is too great. It is just as well that there would be plain speaking on that question. Deputy Cole also said:"I have been told by people who are supposed to be in the know, and to have considerable influence, that it is useless for Deputies on these benches to oppose this move. We have been told that the two big parties are out to see which can get the most credit in this political game...." This is not in any respect a political game. If we are vieing with each other in support of this particular Bill, we are not playing any political game; it is because we have found something in common, something on which we can stand together; and if we find anything tending towards our national advancement and upon which we can stand together in this House, we will do it. It may be very annoying to Deputy Cole and to other people who hold the Deputy's views to see us do that, but to me it is one of the most satisfactory things that has occurred since I came into the House.
There has been a good deal of talk about compulsion, but the strange thing is that the people who talk most about compulsion in the matter of Irish, are the people who were most strongly in favour of compulsion in regard to other matters. Sometime ago a Bill was introduced here for the insertion of a conscience clause in the Vaccination Act. Compulsory vaccination got tremendous support from the very people who are now against compulsion in the matter of the Irish language. Those people were very strongly in favour of compulsion in the matter of vaccination. They cannot have it both ways, and we must come to the conclusion that it is not really the compulsion that worries them, but there is something deeper that these people have not given expression to in the course of the debate.
Deputy Haslett wants to know if our constituents are clamouring for this Bill. Deputy Haslett has not heard them clamour. I am quite sure he is honest when he says that he did not hear any people in County Monaghan clamouring for the Bill. But Deputy Haslett does not mix with the people who want this Bill to become law. The people he mixes with do not want compulsory Irish, but then those people form only a minor section. The people who sent me here, and very many other people, too, in County Monaghan do want to see the national language taking its proper place in the affairs of the nation. Judging by the reception that this Bill has got here, I think the views of that section of the people in County Monaghan are going to be satisfied. Deputy Haslett wants to know why do not schools opt out. He says that they could opt out in his particular constituency if a majority of the parents wished. I am quite certain that they will not opt out when they discover that Irish will be a distinct asset, and there will be far less opting out than the Deputy seems to think when they find that there will be no public position open to them unless they have a knowledge of the Irish language. The economic situation will be the deciding factor, and when they find that without a knowledge of the language they will be debarred in many quarters from obtaining good public positions, there will be very little anxiety to opt out.
Every week that passes sees people going wholesale out of the Gaeltacht and out of other parts of Ireland as well. We are told here that if we make Irish compulsory we are going to drive classes of people out of the country. I submit that our most important duty is, first of all, to keep those people in the country who are prepared to accept our language, our games and our traditions. I maintain that it is much better for us to legislate for Gaels in this Dáil than for West Britons.
I have been quite satisfied to give other Deputies an opportunity of speaking on the subject of the Irish language. I have said so much elsewhere on the subject that I have not much reason to complain. I find from what I listened to here that anything one would say in regard to this Bill could scarcely be irrelevant. I remember when first I came to this House I was called to order by one of the Farmer Deputies for speaking on a subject not concerned with the hygiene of cows. The Ceann Comhairle said that Deputy Doctor Hennessy was not out of order but that his remarks were disorderly. I am afraid there are a lot of disorderly remarks in connection with this Bill.
I would like to get the chapter and verse of that quotation.
Deputy Conlon has proposed this Bill, and Deputy MacFadden has seconded it. Neither of those Deputies could be charged with discourtesy. I know the Deputies fairly well, and I do not think there are two more courteous members in this House. I believe they are perfectly honest and they will hesitate before they go in for any mock courtesy. Let me ask: What would be the meaning or where would the courtesy come in—where would be the balm for the wounded bodies of, say, the Incorporated Law Society and the Benchers—if you sent a deputation to them consisting of Deputy Conlon with a blackthorn stick in his hand, on his left flank Deputy Carney also with a blackthorn, and on his right flank Deputy Mullins with two blackthorn sticks? I do not think it would make things a bit smoother. I prefer Deputy Conlon's way of dealing with this matter. I believe it is an honest way.
I know the Bill will pass, and I know I will be taunted that I am voting Unionist. Certain Deputies have been described as Unionists because of their objection to this Bill. They have maintained that the position Gaelic is occupying is pure camouflage and that it serves no purpose. We have been told that we who accepted the Constitution should support this Bill. I would like anybody to search the Constitution and to tell us where there is anything there indicating that for a pack of defenceless men like the lawyers we are to pass a Bill providing that they must learn Gaelic and have a competent knowledge of it. I would like to be consistent, and I do not see why a law should be brought in making it compulsory for those administering the law to have a knowledge of Gaelic while the law-makers can go scot-free. We have heard something about the dim and distant future and what is going to happen then. So far as I can gather, the dim and distant future means that fifty years hence members of this House and the people in the country will have a thorough knowledge of Gaelic. The main object is that it will-not apply to ourselves. If I saw members of this House, especially the Gaelic enthusiasts, supporting a Bill providing that within six months no Deputy would be entitled to sit here except he had a competent knowledge of Irish, I could understand the situation and sympathise with it.
There is no analogy between a proposition like that and what is in the Bill.
I know that there is no analogy for anything that hits ourselves. That is the trouble. That is a happy way we have for disposing of awkward proposals. We are told that the professions want special consideration. They do not want special consideration, they only want to be on a level with the trades unions. Will Deputies support a Bill that apprentices to trades shall not be qualified until they have a competent knowledge of Irish? Why will they not do that? Because these apprentices have votes and lawyers—well, they are only comparatively few and they will not turn an election. We are also told that the State confers a monopoly on lawyers and doctors. What monopoly is conferred on them? To become a doctor, a solicitor or a barrister, a person resident in the provinces will have to spend about £1,500 from the time he starts his preparatory course at fourteen or fifteen, goes through a college or university course, until he qualifies at 25 years of age. My experience of the professions is that it is a bad investment from the point of view of the return to be got out of it. Why do we get a monopoly? Is it in our own interest? It is not. There is no other body there to do the work, and we get a monopoly in the public interests. Of course, it will mean more votes to say: "Look at what we have done for you; we have allowed no quack doctors or lawyers to interfere with your interests." That is the reason we have a monopoly. If any other people were fit to do it, I am sure they would share the monopoly with us.
A competent knowledge of Irish has been spoken of. I was always a bit of a dullard myself in languages and everything else, but I tell the House that to get a competent knowledge of Irish would take three years' constant study—that is, if a person is to do justice to his client in the law courts. That is where the camouflage comes in. We have heard that the standard of Irish for the National University will be about the standard required for lawyers. I know graduates of the National University who passed their examination in Irish, and when they were up for positions and had to pass an elementary examination in Irish they did not get a mark—not half a mark—nor did they complain of the appraisement of the examiner. That is what we know about the National University standard. Of course, I cannot say anything about the effect of making Irish compulsory in the National University. If it is not mere camouflage it will be a serious study, and I can quite understand medical and law students, but medical students especially, going to an English University on that account. I do not know how that is going to benefit this country, as the £1,500 spent on each student will go to another country. I know some who have gone already. They say they will never get anything to do in Ireland, and want to go to the country in which they will have to live in order to cultivate its customs and general business habits, and I believe that is a good investment. If you are going to make the study of Gaelic a real thing it will be a further incentive to them to leave the country.
We have also heard a lot about the effect which the study of Gaelic has on other subjects. I have quoted in another place some of the facts in relation to that. In the Intermediate Certificate Honours and Pass List, I find that one pupil got as many as six honours with no marks in Gaelic, and his total marks were 1,631. He failed to pass the examination. Then we come to a pupil who got a pass in Irish, failed in English, had no marks in Greek, Latin and French, failed in history and geography, got a pass in mathematics and honours in science—the only honours he got—a pass in drawing, and had a total of 792 marks. He passed his examination, whereas the boy who failed in Irish, but got a total of 1,631 marks, failed to pass. I do not think that is right. However, it shows one thing, that even if he failed in Irish it did not affect his other subjects, because he was able to get honours in six of them without having studied Irish.
Might I ask what percentage of intermediate students were in such a plight as that?
I am giving the figures and the Deputy will have to be content with them. I cannot at the moment make up the percentages. The Deputy asks a question that he knows it is impossible to answer at the moment. He can satisfy himself, as he has the same means of doing it as I have.
I calculated that it was .001 per cent.
The fact remains that the boy who got a total of 1,631 marks with six honours failed to get a pass, whereas the boy with a knowledge of Irish with only one honour and a total of 792 marks passed. Taking the other side of it, I find here that four or five boys or girls, as the case may be, got honours in Irish but failed in all the other subjects or got bad marks in them, with the result that notwithstanding their honours in Irish they failed in the examination. Is the study of Gaelic such a wonderful thing after all when we get these results? A great deal has been said about compulsion, and a good deal of confusion has arisen as the result of the remarks made about it. There are some things to which compulsion is legitimate, but there are many things to which it is not legitimate to apply compulsion.
Vaccination, for instance.
There should be no compulsion necessary for the study of Irish if the people were keen about it. I think nobody would dispute that. But are they keen about it? Last Sunday was a flag day for the Gaelic League. I went to a few Catholic churches and I wore a flag myself. I always do it, because it helps to promote the voluntary study of Irish. But what did I find? I found boys and girls importuning the people to buy flags, but not one in fifty people bought a flag.
Does the Deputy want to pass a law compelling people to be members of the Gaelic League or to buy a flag?
That is not worthy of Deputy Tierney or of the University he represents.
May I say—
We will hear Deputy Hennessy.
Deputy Hennessy will allow me, I am sure——
No. I will not allow the Deputy to allow Deputy Tierney.
I would allow the Deputy, but he is so outrageously out of order that An Ceann Comhairle will not allow him. I know this flag illustration is not liked. I know there are Gaelic enthusiasts whose one idea is to have the Ireland of the near future a Gaelic-speaking country when not a word of the hated Saxon's language will be heard. I was told thirty years ago that in ten years, from that date, all this would come to pass, but it did not and I have grown sceptical. I would not care to see the English language abolished in this country. I shall be candid with Deputies. I think we would lose by it. It was in English that Robert Emmet spoke, that Wolfe Tone spoke and that Philpot Curran spoke. I say that the most imperishable lessons in Irish patriotism have been spoken in the English language.
There is one thing I do not like to see here. There is too much of the jack-boot and mailed fist display. I do not believe that the whole Opposition share that and I think if they would use their influence with some of their fellow Deputies it might be very advisable. It is all very well to talk. There has been something said about partition, but I really believe that they want to have the unity of Ireland. We are not going about it as we should. Those people in the North of Ireland look upon compulsory Irish as almost a religious test and they say: "If they do that with Irish then what else may they not do when they get us in." I think it would be worth while to give this thing further consideration.
I have heard it said that a knowledge of Irish will stop emigration. We hear bald statements made like that. Deputies who make them do not feel under any necessity to give any facts about them. Is there not emigration from every other nation in the world?
From where?
From Germany.
What would the percentage be?
Take Germany. How many Germans are there in America? We were always told that it was Gaelic Irishmen that founded the great Republic of America. The Orangeman calls himself a Gael and he has established his claim to be a Gael as well as the southerner. You have plenty of Macs in Northern Ireland, and we are told they played a great part in establishing the great republic. I believe that will not be denied. Still, they did not establish the language—their own language. I have said that there has been emigration from all the first-class nations of the world—from Germany, from Switzerland, from Sweden. There are other countries that have solved emigration and the over-population question in another way and in what I consider a very undesirable way. They have settled it, by race suicide or they have adopted the Stopian philosophy. I hope that will not come to pass here. I think the mentality of this country has been practically strangled by the bandying round of certain shibboleths. I know myself I shall be called a West Briton, a man with a slave mind, a shoneen, a traitor. Then there is the man who talks of the inferiority complex. I often feel like wishing that man eternal torment. Anyhow, these are the things that prevail in this country for arguments. These are the things that make us support any catch-cry. Well, I wish that Heaven, if only for a week-end, could spare St. Patrick to us so that he might do for the shibboleths what he did for the serpents. I need not say that I am going to vote against the Second Reading of this Bill.
Ní gá domh-sa móran do rá ar son an Bhille seo tar éis an méid atá ráidhte. Ós rud é gur labhair an child ba mhó de na Teachtaí as Béarla agus ós rud é ná fuilim in-ánn an Ghaedhilg do labhairt chó maith leis an mBéarla— táim ag éisteacht ó lá go lá annseo leis an mBéarla agus leis an mBéarla amháin, agus b'fheidir gurabé sin an fath—labharfaidh mé as Béarla. Ach tá súil agam go dtiocfaidh an lá nuair a labharfaidh na Teachtaí annseo, as gach áird d'Eirinn, i nGaedhilg. Nuair a thiocfas an lá san, beidh cuid de na Teachtaí nach bhfuil an Ghaedhilg go ro-mhaith aeu fá láthair, chó cleachtuighthe leis an dteangain go mbeidh siad in ánn, i gcionn seachtaine no coichthighse, í do labhairt agus do thuigsint.
I must say that I am perfectly satisfied with the debate so far as it has gone. I notice that although forty-five Deputies have spoken in connection with this measure——
Forty-nine.
Perhaps my figures are wrong. I think one Deputy spoke twice and that might account for it, but fifteen members only spoke against and over thirty spoke in favour of the measure. I think most of the points raised against the Bill have been met by speakers in favour of it. I would like to deal with some points, and with one particularly. It was said by Deputy Cooper, who started the hare, that I and my colleague, Deputy McFadden, were guilty of discourtesy in not approaching both branches of the legal profession before introducing this Bill. A great many other Deputies spoke in the same strain. Deputy Jasper Wolfe worked himself up into a state of wrath over that question. He considered that we were guilty of grave discourtesy in not approaching the profession. Supposing Deputy McFadden and I had approached the Incorporated Law Society and the Benchers of the King's Inns and said to them, "We want you to make Irish a compulsory subject at your examinations," I am afraid we would be putting ourselves in a position in which we would be likely to meet with a rebuff. As a matter of fact, if they were inclined to use the language which Deputy Jasper Wolfe applied to Deputy Flinn, we might be met with "What abominable impertinence!" or, in the language of Deputy Wolfe himself, "What colossal cheek!" But I think we will probably be met with milder language by the societies concerned. They would be likely to tell us to mind our own business, and if we said "We propose to introduce a Bill," they would call that a threat. We did not place ourselves in that position. We introduced a Bill. If the principle of the Bill is approved by the House we will then be in the position of acting for this House, and certainly, so far as we are concerned, if any hardship is to be inflicted as a result of the measure, we are quite prepared to meet any amendments considered desirable, provided that the principle to be enshrined in the Bill is not to be interfered with, that is, we are going to have Irish a subject in the examinations for both branches of this profession. I stated originally when introducing the Bill that I understood the Incorporated Law Society had refused to do anything for the Irish language. Since then I have discovered that they have made it an optional subject, and have been told that it has been an optional subject for at least twenty-five years. If that is so, the fact that it is an optional subject and has not been effective is a good argument in favour of this Bill.
There are a great many matters I would like to deal with, but I think it is better to get through with the Bill this evening and deal only with a few of the points raised. With regard to what has been referred to here as the unity of Ireland, Deputy Ward has dealt with that subject fairly well, but not altogether as I would deal with it. Some persons have said here that unity is more urgent than the restoration of the Irish language. I do not agree with that. One of the reasons we introduced this Bill is because we regard the restoration of the Irish language as more urgent than the unity of Ireland. If the Irish language is not saved in this or the next generation it will be lost for ever. If that occurs there is very little use in doing anything for the Irish language. I am satisfied that the unity of Ireland will come. It can wait longer than the Irish language. Unity may not occur in this generation or the next, but it is bound to come. Deputy Sir James Craig said when the economic conditions are such as to encourage the people of the North to come in, they will come in. I agree with him. The people in the North will see that business is carried on in a fashion that it is to their advantage to come in, and they will come in. It is the economic position of the country that will have its effect there. I am glad that the Minister for Finance intervened with regard to the cost of teaching Irish.
It was stated by several Deputies that the teaching of Irish was costing about half a million in money, but the Minister for Finance stated that the actual cost was about one-tenth of that. Even if it were actually costing more, I do not see why Deputies should object to paying whatever would be necessary to preserve the language. We want to be quite candid about this. If I consider how it is that I am sitting here, or if other Deputies consider why they are sitting here, and if we look back some years, we will realise the reason that brought all of us here. The real origin of the reason why we are here was the fight made throughout the country years ago. We heard a lot about the hardship that would be inflicted on students of the legal profession if this Bill became law, but what is that compared with the hardships which we, rightly or wrongly, inflicted on the people of this country in order to bring about a position in which we could assemble here to discuss the affairs of the country? I do not desire to hide our object, and I state that the principal object we had in view during that fight was to make this a Gaelic State. Some people may say that we have not much chance of doing that, but we are prepared to take our chance, and it is our duty to do so.
The letter which the President wrote to the Gaeltacht Commission contained a paragraph which, if read by Deputies, would make them realise what the whole thing means. So far as we are concerned, we are carrying out the policy which had been in our minds even before 1916, and when the sacrifices made in this country and for which some of us were responsible are considered, I do not think that it can be wondered that we came forward and introduced this Bill. I hope that it will not be necessary to bring in further Bills to deal with other professions, and that they will regard this Bill as a finger-post, not perhaps as a warning, but rather as an indication of what is expected by the people of the country. I am satisfied that the debate will do much good, despite the big headings in the newspapers about "Irish Lawyers and Compulsion, Compulsion." As I say, the debate will do much good, and when the younger people come to our age they will thank this Dáil for having placed them in the position that they, in their day, were obliged to learn the Irish language, and will in later years be in a position to avail of it. Unlike many Deputies here, they will not have to regret that they were not compelled, or rather obliged, to learn Irish in their younger days, and they will not, like Deputy Cooper and others, have to spend their time with a book of O'Growney in later life, and then be unable to master the language. These students will have no difficulty in learning it in their youth, because they will have the groundwork and their enthusiasm will carry them forward. I do not know whether there is to be a Division on the Second Reading of the Bill or not, but I am content to leave the matter in the hands of Deputies.
Tá.
- Allen, Denis.
- Anthony, Richard.
- Blaney, Neal.
- Blythe, Ernest.
- Boland, Gerald.
- Bourke, Daniel.
- Brady, Seán.
- Briscoe, Robert.
- Broderick, Henry.
- Brodrick, Seán.
- Buckley, Daniel.
- Carey, Edmund.
- Carney, Frank.
- Carty, Frank.
- Cassidy, Archie J.
- Clancy, Patrick.
- Clery, Michael.
- Colbert, James.
- Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
- Conl n, Martin.
- Connolly, Michael P.
- Corkery, Dan.
- Corish, Richard.
- Corry, Martin John.
- Cosgrave, William T.
- Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
- Crowley, Tadhg.
- Daly, John.
- Davin, William.
- Davis, Michael.
- De Loughrey, Peter.
- Derrig, Thomas.
- De Valera, Eamon.
- Doherty, Eugene.
- Dolan, James N.
- Doyle, Peadar Seán.
- Duggan, Edmund John.
- Dwyer, James.
- Mulcahy, Richard.
- Mullins, Thomas.
- Murphy, James E.
- Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
- Nally, Martin Michael.
- Nolan, John Thomas.
- O'Connell, Richard.
- O'Connell, Thomas J.
- O'Connor, Bartholomew.
- O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
- O'Hanlon, John F.
- O'Kelly, Seán T.
- O'Leary, Daniel.
- O'Leary, William.
- O'Reilly, John J.
- O'Reilly, Matthew.
- O'Reilly, Thomas.
- Egan, Barry M.
- Esmonde, Osmond Thos. Grattan.
- Fahy, Frank.
- Fitzgerald, Desmond.
- Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
- Flinn, Hugo.
- Fogarty, Andrew.
- French, Seán.
- Gorey, Denis J.
- Gorry, Patrick J.
- Goulding, John.
- Hassett, John J.
- Hayes, Seán.
- Heffernan, Michael R.
- Hennessy, Michael Joseph.
- Hennigan, John.
- Henry, Mark.
- Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
- Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
- Holt, Samuel.
- Houlihan, Patrick.
- Jordan, Stephen.
- Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
- Kent, William R.
- Keogh, Myles.
- Kerlin, Frank.
- Killane, James Joseph.
- Killilea, Mark.
- Kilroy, Michael.
- Lemass, Seán F.
- Little, Patrick John.
- Maguire, Ben.
- McEllistrim, Thomas.
- MacEntee, Seán.
- McFadden, Michael Og.
- Mongan Joseph W.
- Moore, Séamus.
- Morrissey, Daniel.
- O'Sullivan, Gearoid.
- O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
- Powell, Thomas P.
- Reynolds, Patrick.
- Roddy, Martin.
- Ruttledge, Patrick J.
- Ryan, James.
- Sexton, Martin.
- Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
- Sheehy, Timothy (Tipp.).
- Smith, Patrick.
- Tierney, Michael.
- Tubridy, John.
- Vaughan, Daniel.
- Walsh, Richard.
- Ward, Francis C.
- White, Vincent Joseph.
Níl.
- Alton, Ernest Henry.
- Beckett, James Walter.
- Byrne, John Joseph.
- Coburn, James.
- Cole, John James.
- Cooper, Bryan Ricco.
- Craig, Sir James.
- Good, John.
- Haslett, Alexander.
- Hennessy, Thomas.
- Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
- Murphy, Joseph Xavier.
- Myles, James Sproule.
- O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
- Thrift, William Edward.