Ireland must be one of the least-polled countries in Europe.

In recent years only two public opinion polls dealing with political issues have been carried out and published-both on specialised topics. Irish attitudes to the Common Market were polled seven years ago by Gallup, and attitudes to the Irish language were the subject of a poll carried out by Irish Marketing Surveys
1966.

In this issue NUSIGHT presents a first instalment of the results of the only comprehensive political opinion poll ever carried out in this country. This poll was based on a sample of over 2,000, large enough to give a reliable insight into the political attitudes not only of the country as a whole, but of people in different areas, different social groups, and different age groups. The poll was carried out by Social Surveys (Gallup Polls) earlier this year, and because of its timing it throws remarkable light on the recent General Election. By comparing the attitudes of voters in April with how they actually voted two months later, it is possible to assess the impact of the General Election campaign on the election results. This, together with an analysis of Irish political allegiances in terms of social groups and age structure, forms the subject of this first article. Subsequent articles will deal with other aspects of Irish political attitudes revealed by this poll. They will answer such questions as ;-

How many people are paid-up members of political parties? How many people have heard of various political personalities ? How were the three party leaders viewed by the electorate last April ? What did the people know of the party's politics before the election ? What do people consider the main national and local problems to be, and which party is seen as best able to deal with them? What are peoples' attitudes to trade unions, the revival of Irish, foreign investment, the Common Market? What social surveys should have priority ? What party is the second choice of supporters of Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and Labour? To what media do people look for information about politics? What papers do the supporters of the different parties read? How many supporters of each party are members of trade unions or farm organisations? How many people own their houses, and how many rent them from county councils or private landlords?

NOTICES
The reaction to our September issue was very favourable. We printed 40,000 copies of the issue and sold out within a few days. Consideration was given to doing a reprint but it transpired not to be feasible. However, at present we are looking into the possibilities of publishing a pamphlet on Northern Ireland with the photographs displayed in the last issue. We will have further information on this in November. In the introduction to the September issue we credited John Dowling, Rosita Sweetman and David Shanks with the interpretation of the events in Northern Ireland. This was inaccurate. John Dowling and Rosita Sweetman assisted with the background research and David Shank's contributions were considered unsuitable for publication. We apologise to those misled or embarrassed by this error. The unsigned articles which are printed in NUSIGHT are frequently the work of more than one staff member and always the subject of discussion by the entire editorial staff. We consider the signing of articles, with a number of exceptions to be generally irrelevant and often distracting. We very much regret the delay in the publication of this issue of NUSIGHT.We are making every effort to ensure that further publication dates are kept. The next issue of NUSIGHT will appear on November 7th. Our readers will have noticed the price increase from

1/- to 2/- this month. We hope that recent improvements

in the quality and size of the magazine will compensate adequately for this increase.

As a follow up to our analysis of the crisis in Northern Ireland in the September issue of NUSIGHTwe probed the nature of Paisleyism, its social and economic roots and its religious entanglements. We sketch a profile of the Rev. Ian Paisley and we do an enquiry into the August pogroms in Belfast. Section on the North begins on Page 8.

In his lifetime Ho Chi Minh became the symbol of the struggle against all forms of oppression throughout the world. We trace the history of his life in the context of Vietnam and we endeavour to establish his significance. Beginning on page 61.

The August crisis in Northern Ireland provoked the most serious crisis within the Fianna Fail Government since Jack Lynch became Taoiseach. On page 3 we begin an exclusive inside report on the political battle which shook Fianna Fail to its foundations.

On page 45 we publish an account of J. B. Keane's talk to the Monday Circle. Edna O'Brien will be the personality in this feature next month.

Patrick Cosgrave, until recently R.T.E. London correspondent, has become one of our regular contributors. He will write a monthly feature from London. This month he deals with Britain's new morality, on page 32.

THE TUMULTUOUS EVENTS in Northern Ireland caused the most serious crisis in the Government since Jack Lynch became Taoiseach. Indeed on at least two occasions the Government was in danger of breaking up and that it did not do so was due more to the, fortuitous turn of events than anything else. On August 1, Dr. Hillery, the Minister for External Affairs, went to London for a "secret" meeting with Mr. Stewart, the British Foreign Secretary. The purpose of the meeting was to warn the British Government of the possible consequences of the August 12 Apprentice Boys march which Dr. Hillery felt would lead inevitably to serious disturbances. Mr. Stewart expressed some irritation with the Irish Government's meddling in

United Kingdom affairs and he said that Stormont and Westminster could handle the situation very well between them. Hillery mentioned that Ireland would take the matter to the United Nations if there was any outbreak of violence. Stewart was not impressed. The sending of Hillery to London to confer with Stewart acknowledged the jurisdiction of the British Government over Northern Ireland affairs-this was in contrast to the statements made later in the month by Mr. Lynch's and Dr. Hillery s own speeches at the United Nations. It also contrasted rather sharply with the expressed attitudes of Kevin Boland and Neil Blaney on partition which precluded, if taken to their logicalconclusion, any recognition of the British Government's jurisdiction in the " Six Counties."

"Something must be doneWhen the trouble broke out on August 12 in Derry the Cabinet, whose members were dispersed throughout the country, hastily assembled on the morning of Wednesday, August 13. It remained in session for the entire day. The reaction to the events on the previous day and night in Derry, in which the R.U.C. used tear-gas on the Bogsidersand there were 112casualties, was emotive. There was unanimity that "the situation could not be allowed to continue" and that " something must be done," but specifically what was not very clear. Early on it was agreed that the army should be moved up to the border in force-if such a term can be used in the context of the Irish army. And during the day

an order was given to the army headquarters to that effect. It was only later in the day that the guise of fieldhospitals was thought of. While no concrete decision was made to invade Northern Ireland, it was generally assumed that a decision to invade would be made if the Derry crisis worsened. The reasons for the decision to send up troops to the border were firstly to assuage republican sentiment in the country, and especially within the Fianna Fail Party itself and secondly, to let "our people" in the North know that the Government of the Republic was willing to help. There was overwhelming support in the Cabinet for this decision. Blaney and Boland, of course, were delighted that at last something was being donebut, less predictably, the move had the influential support of Charles Haughey and also of Brian Lenihan and the Taoiseach. It seems Haughey calculated that unless the Government acted strongly " irresponsible groups" in the Republic, i.e. the I.R A., might attract substantial public support and take precipitous independent action. There was also a rather woolly hope that by escalating the situation, the British Government would be forced

to intervene directly, as it eventually did. Others in the Cabinet were less sure. Dr. Hillery was seriously concerned that any action of the Republic's Government might only further exacerbate the situation and lead to loss of life, especiallyin Belfast, which was smouldering at the time. In this view Dr. Hillery was supported by George Colley. However, the Cabinet was in no mood to rationalise the possible consequence of its actions-the temper was hot and impetuous. It was decided that the Taoiseach should make an address to the nation on radio and television that night and the outline of the speech was discussed and agreed on by the Cabinet. Lynch's Speech The Government meeting ended some time after six o'clock and immediately an official in the Taoiseach's department began a draft of Mr. Lynch's statement based on the notes of the Cabinet meeting. The draft was completed by 7.30 p.m.a copy was sent to R.T.E. to be typed on to the teleprompter and at 8.0 p.m. the Taoiseach recorded his, by now, historic address to the nation.

The speech suffered from the short time available in which to compose it and the rather confused Cabinet directives given to the composer. However, the Cabinet's tentative decision to invade came through quite unequivocally: ". . . it is clear now that the present situation cannot be allowed to continue" and ". . . it is clear also that the Irish Government can no longer stand by and watch innocent people injured and perhaps worse." In the first half of the statement the reason for concern and involvement in Northern Ireland affairs would appear to be humanitarian, but later on this becomes confused with the partition issue. The employment of British troops is deemed unacceptable for reasons other that their pacifying capabilities. Despite this refusal to contemplete the use of British troops to restore law and order, however, the statement then goes on in an extraordinary double-think manner to again recognise the jurisdiction of the British Government over Northern Ireland affairs by requesting it to apply to the U.N. for the urgent dispatch of a peacekeeping force. The logic of the refusal to accept the intervention of British troops would surely have been

to apply directly to the U.N. for a peace-keeping force ? This confusion was the product of the Cabinet's division. Those who were concerned with the purely humanitarian question saw that the situation demanded British intervention-while the Republican element couldn't abide with the idea of British troops on Irish soil. The excuse to send up the army to the Border was pathetic-but it worked. All in all, the immediate reaction to the Taoiseach's address was one of overwhelming approval in the Republic. All the newspapers commended it and the opposition parties and more particularly the LR.A. were checkmated by it. For at least twenty-four hours Lynch was a national hero of Dev-size proportions. On the following day, Thursday, the Cabinet again met in the morning and the afternoon while the troops continued to mass on the border. "Field hospitals" were set up at Fort Dunnee (on Lough Swilly), Rockwell House (Letterkenny), Cavan military Barracks, Castleblayney,and Dundalk. An army spokesman denied that there was a massive call-up or mobilisation. But the fact was that the Department of Defence and the Army Head Quarters were in a tizzy trying to organise sufficient forces and equipment for invasion. The Chief of Staff, General Sean Mac Eoin, attended the Cabinet meeting and further discussion was given to the possibility of invading, but again no concrete decision was reached. It was agreed, however, that if there was to be an invasion, which would have certainly occurred in the event of a blood bath in Derry or any of the border towns, troops would be sent in as soon as possible to Derry, Strabane and Newry. One of the inhibiting factors in a decisionto invade was the run-down state of the army which was totally unequipped to deal with the only possible military contingency that could arise, i.e, intervention in Northern Ireland. On that evening British troops were sent into Derry, Dr. Hillery was dispatched to London to see Jim Callaghan and serious violence broke out in Belfast where four people were killed. The Government met again for a full day's session on Friday. Tension ran high in the light of the previous night's violence in Belfast. A decision was taken in the morning to call up the army reservists. The reason for this remains totally obscure even to some Cabinet ministers; the main one would appear to have been to mollify Kevin Boland.

Boland storms out to mobilise On the intervention of the British troops in Derry-and the imminence of their intervention in Belfast-many of the Cabinet ministers, including Haughey and Lenihan, who previously had considered seriously the possibility of invasion now ruled it out of the question. Blaney and Boland thought otherwise and pressed for immediate intervention throughout the North, including Belfast. Blaney was eventually convinced of the lunacy of this view-but Boland would not be deterred. On realising that he wasn't going to get his way he stormed out of the Cabinet meeting, nearly taking the door off its hinges in his wake. His movements over the next twentyfour hours are difficult to track down. However, he dismissed his ministerial car and driver and was chauffered around by a friend. It appears he decided to mobilise a private army of his own, for he telephoned a number of acquaintances and told them to hold themselves in readiness for an invasion of the North and that he would supply the guns. At some stage during the day he paid a visit to the Park-presumably for the pontifical blessing before setting out on his crusade-and it is perhaps there that he was dissuaded from his plans. Hillery annoyed Meanwhile in London, Dr. Hillery remained unaware of what was happening until lunchtime when he was telephoned by Lynch to be told of the decision to call up the army reservists. Hillery who was to see Chalfont in the afternoon-Callaghan and Stewart being away on holidays-enquired as to the reason for the decision but could get no satisfactory reply from Lynch. The doctor's normally unflappable temperament was flapped-and this was conveyed to Lynch. By this time Hillery had very nearly had enough. He was perhaps the only one in the Cabinet, with the possible exception of Colley, who saw the danger of exacerbating the situation in the North by any inflammatory statements from the Irish Government. He had constantly referred at Cabinet meetings to the 400,000 hostages in Northern Ireland whose lives could be endangered by any aggressive noises from the South. He was infuriated by the decision to call up the army reservists which he felt would have precisely the exacerbating effect he feared. The thought of resignation crossed his mind, but on reflection he concluded that he could serve the humanitarian cause best by continuing to exert his influence on the Cabinet.

In the afternoon he met Chalfont; the meeting was unproductive and indeed coldly hostile. Afterwards he met the press and T.V. reporters who grilled him on the call up of the army reservists and Lynch's broadcastboth of which he himself disagreed with. However, he " carried the can " manfully. In the course of a T.V. interview he said that Irish troops would not intervene unilaterally-this comment evoked some criticism from a number of his colleagues on his return. On Saturday, August 16, Dr. Hillery flew to the United Nations in New York to request a special meeting of the Security Council to discuss the situation in Northern Ireland. Ireland v, the U.N. Since the late fifties, Ireland has enjoyed a prestige at the United Nations quite underestimated by most people at home. At that time due mainly to the efforts of Conor Cruise O'Brien and the then Irish Ambassador to the United Nations-Freddie Boland -Ireland virtually led the world organisation. It took bold initiatives on peace-keeping, disarmament and, for a brief spell, on recognition of Red China. Because of this diplomatic activity, Ireland was vitally involved in the internal politics of the U.N. and played a significant role in the backroom manoeuvres of both the General Assembly and, for one year, the Security Council. Since the retirement of both Freddie Boland and Conor Cruise O'Brien, Ireland's position at the U.N. has sagged-fewer and fewer initiatives have been taken and the bold independent policies of the Boland-O'Brien era have largely been abandoned. However, some of the old reputation still survives-disproportionate to the country's size and current desserts. It was to this environment that Dr. Hillery went for the first time as Minister for External affairs. He was completely unaccustomed to the rather peculiar customs of the U.N. and relied heavily on his resident ambassador, Cornelius Cremin, who had replaced Boland, and the secretary of the Department of External Affairs, Hugh McCann. The issue which Ireland was presenting to the Security Council posed problems for the Council's members. The majority were sympathetic to Ireland and were concerned that it should not be humiliated. Also as practical politicians they appreciated the political pressures on Hillery to utilise the services of the U.N. for domestic political consumption.

The Finnish Ambassador, Mr. Max Iakobson took the initiative and during the few days prior to the Security Council meeting he canvassed the other members of the Security Council to agree to a formula whereby Ireland could present its case, not have to suffer an adverse vote but, at the same time, avoid the dangerous precedent of permitting the internal affairs of a member state to be the proper subject of a U.N. debate. There was no opposition to this formula except from the British delegate, Lord Caradon, who was eventually persuaded to concede by a member of the U.S. delegation. It was only after all these soundings had been taken by the Finnish ambassador that the Irish delegation was informed of the agreement and it was relieved to go along with it. On the afternoon of August 21, the Security Council met and Dr. Hillery was permitted to address the meeting. His speech, which had been outlined by the Government in Dublin with whom Hillery remained in constant touch (there were hilarious stories circulating among the Irish contingent at the U.N. of him on the phone at the same time to both Lynch and Haughey -each offering contradictory advice-) was drafted by Cremin and two other members of the delegation, Paddy Power and Declan Connolly. Hillery s Speech The speech was confused, retlecting the two prevailing strands of opinion within the Cabinet. On the one hand, Dr. Hillery argued for the inscription of the Northern Ireland issue on the Security Council agenda as the six counties were not validly part of the United Kingdom and, on the other, that the issue should be discussed in the same manner as apartheid in South Africa is regularly' discussed at the U.N. as a human rights issue. Indeed throughout the speech the partition issue and the civil rights question are unhappily intermingled. Dr. Hillery's own view was that the civil rights issue also should be stressed but strong pressure from the republican element in the Cabinet and within his own party demanded the constant stressing of the partition question. Apart from these contradictions the speech was a very clever one-using former statements of the British delegation and of Lord Caradon to support its case. Lord Caradon replied in a restrained manner to Dr. Hilery's speech but refused to entertain the idea of having the item inscribed on the agenda. The

SOVlCl: delegate Mr. Aleksei Zokhanof, supported the Irish case and then the discussion was adjourned unanimously on the suggestion of the Zambia representative, Mr. Lishournva Mauka. It all went offas planned. There wasnever any question of the matter going to a vote and if it had it is difficult to see how anybody would have voted for the inscription of the item. Even the Soviet Union could not have voted for the Irish case-for in doing so it left the way open for U.N. discussion on the internal affairs of its own countrywhich could be very embarrassing. The Soviet delegation spoke in favour of the Irish case in the knowledge that an agreement had been made not to take a vote.

Diplomatic Chaos While Hillery was at the U.N. and indeed since the crisis first erupted there had been feverishly diplomatic activity in the Irish missions all over the world. One major problem was that all telephone calls to Europeindeed beyond-had to be routed through London which was embarrassing. Resort washad to the first language but generally unsuccessfully. Many of the telegraphic messages were sent in code and in those embassies where the code-book could be found many ambassadors' wives were pressed into tedious de-coding operations.

Cabinet Volte-tace Two days after Dr. Hillery's U.N. speech the Government issued a statement on the Wilson/Chichester-Clark " Declaration" of the previous Tuesday. The statement was strongly critical of the inadequacy of the reform plans announced in the "Declaration". Very clearly the statement was motivated by a concern for civil rights and less pre-occupied with the partition issue-though it was mentioned. This reflected a change of attitude by the Government which had been coming about since the British troops entered Belfast. Haughey and Lenihan had abandoned Boland and Blaney on the hawk limb and had to swing around in favour of doing a deal with Britain whereby civilrights in Northern Ireland would be guaranteed. This was the theme of the Taoiseach's speech later in Tralee. By this time the Cabinet crisis was over. Boland was isolated on his own-abandoned in his madness even by Blaney-and the split between Hillery and Lynch had been healed by the change of mind.

Lynch weakened Thougn Lynch's position publically was much enhanced by his famous hard-line speech of August 13-his position within the Cabinet is much weakened. He was confused and baffled in the height of the crisis and virtually abdicated leadership to Haughey. The latter's position in the Government strengthens it seems daily. He is by far the most capable and by now the most respected member of it. The Cabinet's reliance on him in time of crisis is remarkable in view of many of its members' deep hostility to him a few years ago. Even Colley now acknowledges his leadership. Hillery has also emerged as quite a force--and it is now believed that were the leadership issue to arise again in the near future-he would be in a very strong position despite Haughey's current dominance. Hillery is deceptively quiet and manages to hide a penetrating intellect and deep-rooted determination. We could re-acquire a foreign policy with him in Iveagh House. Lenihan is likely to become the chief " machinator" in the Cabinet. His demotion from education has rankled him and his new job as Minister for Transport moreover, simply doesn't adequately engagehis many capabilities. He will therefore have a lot of time to "play politics" which won't be to Lynch's advantage. The latter would be well advised to promote him to a time-consuming post e.g, agriculturewhen the next cabinet re-shuffleoccurs. In a way this crisis represents the last death-throe of the republican element within the Fianna Fail party. The only remaining republicans, Blaney and Boland, wanted to make the ultimate' gesture-perhaps more out of a desperate assertion of their republicanism than a conviction that what they advocated was right. The mohaired suit bourgeois element which Lemass introduced in the early sixties has now total control of the party-but through a brilliant piece of political shadowboxing has deceived the electorate into believing otherwise.

Special

Branch

in

league

with

R.U.C.
One final observation on the North. Members of the Government are now asserting that they were in touch with what was happening in the north through fifty special branch men stationed there. The fact is that whereas there were fifty special branch men in the north they were helping the R.U.C. to identify LR.A. men. Who runs this country anyway!

THE NORTHERN
THE SITUATION in the North is now more grave than it has ever been before. When trouble broke out in earlier decades it cost many lives but rapidly dwindled in intensity. For months now, despite a massive deployment of troops, trouble has continued and even spread. In August trouble was mainly confined to two areas of Belfast: the Falls Road area and the Ardoyne area. Since then the Antrim Road and the Ballymacarrett areas have become increasinglyinvolved. No week has passed without a major incident. Tear-gas has been used on three separate weekends against Protestant crowds, and many of their leaders, including Paisley and McKeague, have been gassed. The Sandy Row area is now the only Protestant working-class district which has not seen direct confrontation between localsand the troops. The trouble has not only included sporadic bursts of vandalism and looting but has involved thousands of Protestants of all ages, whose deep anger and humiliation worsens with each successiveweekend. This anger which is directed at British troops ultimately involves the British government. Callaghan tendentiously distributes blame Callaghan has clearly recognised the immense danger to British prestige implied in this continued street-fighting. At the Labour Party Congress he made a deliberate attempt to conciliate Protestant opinion by trying to distribute blame in a highly tendentious manner. This points to his awareness that the Protestant right-wing has been immeasurably strengthened by the involvement of the British troops. Belfast cannot be quietened. The troops are caught in an extremely delicate position. When they attempted to conciliate opinion in Belfast by refusing to enforce law and order tension was created by their obvious inability to protect the Catholic community. When they decided to baton and teargas Protestant crowdsthey further deepened Protestant animosity. Either way they have only managed to worsen the situation. The only way the troops could have stopped riotous assembly and agitation in Protestant areas would have been to occupy all Belfast by force, thus paving the way for a full scale insurrection. Because they could not do this they have been forced to allow Catholics to protect themselves and have consequently appeared partisan. Before Callaghan's first visit to the

CRISIS STILL SMOULDERS

In the last year Britain has reversed stands it has taken on the North for fifty years. Westminster has created the precedent of discussing the North. It has openly intervened in internal matters in Northern Ireland even if it has not yet admitted it. Because Britain now discounts the possibility of a complete takeover does not invalidate its feasibility. The stage is rapidly being approached where two crises are being reached simultaneously. Firstly Stormont may reach a point where it will have to openly oppose a a British diktat to preserve any credibility with its supporters. This could occur on a number of issues such as the recomposition of the B Specials or the continued existence of "Free Derry" and "Free Belfast." Such opposition would not be a declaration of U.D.I. but it would have the same effect. It would precipitate a constitutional crisis. The second crisis is dangerously near already. A point is being reached where to stop a further outbreak of Protestant repression and dissidence in the ranks of the troops, the British military may have to place all Belfast under army control. This would have the effect of jeopardising police loyalty to the constitutional government and of creating a state of open rebellion among thousands of Protestants. Every week more drastic measures are being taken by the troops. The logical end of this escalation is military occupation of the city. Catholic bigotry Another problem for Britain in its efforts to contain the situation is the' evidence of galloping bigotry among Catholics. The kicking of a well-known Paisleyite Protestant to death in Derry removes a strong misconception. One hope for peace in the past was the lack of real provocation of the Protestants by the Catholic community. The fear which the fascists played on in August were fears of a Southern invasion and of a defeated RU.C. in Derry. But the provocation of a Protestant being killed by a Catholic mob is very real and makes it highly problematic that Catholics will continue to direct their bitterness against the Unionist government rather than the Paisleyite despoilers. If the Paisleyite forces of the U.V.F. and the local Belfast defence committees unleash their forces they may bring Stormont tumbling down in ruins and like Samson destroy themselvesin the process. So much depends on whether Paisley and his men know how near they are to forcing a total abolition of Unionism on Westminster.

North, Stormont had agreed to pass diluted reforms based on new gerrymandered local councils and on reduced power in local government. However, the visit had the effect of making these reforms appear to be a concession to Britain. Callaghan's establishment of the Hunt commission appeared to be a direct threat to the Protestant militia, who have been the bastion of security for the Protestant working class and provided employment and flattery for hundreds of Protestant working-class youths. The Stormont Government has been totally alienated from the movement of Protestant reaction. Chichester-Clark can no longer make speeches blaming the I.RA. or speeches attacking the demand for certain civil rights. Part of the price for his survival has been the winning of unanimous cabinet support for highly unpopular measures. The prestige of the government among the rank and file of the R U.C. must be at an all-time low. The Government can no longer gain support by forcing militant confrontation with the largely Catholic civil rights movement. The absurd posturing and repression which helped make Stormont appear to be accepting its demands while crushing the movement has all stopped. Now the reality of Stormont's sell-out to Catholic militancy confronts the Protestant right-wing. Labour must pretend British imperialism dead The basic contradiction in the North is that Britain is being forced to act in a way which makes the situation worse. If Britain in previous periods of trouble allowed the Orange militia to terrorise the Catholic population into submission, it cannot tolerate this any longer. The Labour government has to pretend that the era of British Imperialism is dead and the interests of British capital lie in a stable, integrated society and not one dominated by local factory-owners. Britain has accordingly supported the Civil Rights Movement. It cannot draw back when the unrealised power of Protestant reaction has revealed itself. All this means that decisions affecting the future of the North can now be taken by the extra-parliamentary Protestant street militia. The extreme right has the support of overwhelming numbers in Belfast and the parliamentary forces cannot affect this polarisation. If there is another pogrom the possibility of a British takeover of Stormont cannot be discounted.

"THE PROTESTANT PEOPLE of Ulster are seeing the wonderful works of God this very hour-Jesus stands among us-he has risen us up to fight the forces of Romanism and all its allies." " Hallelujah." "Our cause is righteous and is washed in the Blood of the Lamb." Shouts of " Glory" interspersed with low murmurs of " Praise the Lord." "We are here to DEFEND the Gospel-not to preach it like Simms and Gallagher. We will defend it with our blood like the martyrs of old who would not bow to the forces of Popery, and the scarlet whore drunk on the BLOOD of the Churches." Paisley stood among his own people

in the Ulster Hall. He had just returned from his trip to America and he faced his normal congregation of well dressed, dowdy people and young thugs with Clyde Valley badges standing in their midst. His message was a roaring medley of hatred and self-preening. He pleased everybody. "Let us pause now for prayerremembering those who have left us in the last month-Jack Todd murdered by Fenians after talking peace and Jack Linton shot by a mob of Papists burning and looting Protestant homes. As we pause before the majesty of God we know in our hearts we have no defenceexceptthe all-conqueringpower of God's Grace-Thank God we stand justified and Righteous in the face of

the Lord. He has conquered the forces of the Confessional and he will CONQUER AGAIN." "NO SURRENDER." Ian Paisley is at the moment the most influential person in Northern Ireland. For twenty years he has excited the people of the working class areas of Belfast with his incredible mixture of religion and politics. He now has an audience of far greater significance and size than the congregation he held transfigured in the Ulster Hall, he leads the people who neither understand or approve of the tumultuous events of the last year in Ulster, and who are likely to be the dominant force in Northern Ireland in the near future.

IAN RICHARD KYLE PAISLEY was born, reputedly in Armagh, in 1927. His father, the Reverend J. Kyle Paisley, was a Baptist preacher in Ballymena, where he later formed a breakawayTabernacle. Paisley worked as an assistant in a bakery shop and is said to have started preaching in 1943, at the age of sixteen. That same year he enrolled at the Theological College of the Reformed Prebyterian Church in Belfast, where he completed a threeyear course in 1946 having passed his examinations with credit and having been highly commended as a student and a preacher of the Gospel. By this time his brother Harold Spurgeon Paisley,who had been in the R.A.F. and
10

the Merchant Navy during the war, had given up a post in the R.U.C. to take up an evangelicalcareer. In 1946he was ordained by his father and began a pastoral career in the docklands area in Belfast,where his oratorical abilities won him the attention of Unionist M.P.s. He found time to continue his studies at the Barrie School of Evangelism in South Wales, at the Pioneer Theological Seminar in Illinois and at the Barton Collegeand Seminary at Monitou Springs, Colorado, where he received his M.A. By 1951Paisleywas confident enough of his ability to rally support from the divided Presbyterian Community to set up his own Free Presbyterian Church

in the Ravenhill area of Belfast. The occasion was the refusal of the presbytery of Lissara Presbyterian Church in County Down to allow Paisley the use of their Hall for prayer meetings. The ensuing split in this and other presbyteries provided Mr. Paisley with his initial support. Consolidated his support During the fifties he gradually consolidated his support, devoting a lot of his activities to attempting to convert Catholics. Some of these activities led to the kind of publicity which was later to characterise his career. He formed the Ulster Protestant Action movement in the Belfast aircraft factory, under the

patronage of Rear Admiral Slattery. This movement, which subsequently spread to the Belfast shipyards, was "a necessary counter to Roman Catholic Action" aimed at converting members of the Catholic working-class. In August 1956, Paisley married Eileen Emily Cassells,a member of the Plymouth Brethren, in Belfast. The service was performed by his father and the best man was Rev. John Wylie of Ballymoney, who had already become Paisley's right-hand man. Paisley's first major burst of publicity came in 1956 when it was alleged that the proselytising activities of Ulster Protestant Action oversteppedthe mark. At a meeting outside the Ulster Hall on Thursday, December 20, 1956, a recording was played which was claimed to be the voice of a fifteen-and-a-half year-old, Maura Lyons, The voice said that at an early age she had decided to become a nun, but while "training" for a convent life she had met some friends who had impressed her. They made her feel that hers was a religion of fear and theirs was simple and free from fear. After she had told her parents of her

doubts she returned from work one October evening to find two priests in her room. She escaped from her house and met Mr. Paisley that evening. This announcement was greeted with choruses of "Glory" and "Hallelujah" from the packed congregation in the Ulster Hall. The Court case which ensued was held in camera and a writ was issued forbidding the press to harass the girl or make any further investigations of the case. Paisley's rejoinder was, "the police say 'you are committing an offence' (i.e, in refusing to divulge her whereabouts). Very well, I am committing an offence. I will do time for it. I will be proud to do time for Protestant liberty." Later at a Labour group meeting in Queen's University on the question of Ulster Protestant Action, Paisley, referring to the Catholic Church "as a past master at hiding its own guilt by accusingthose who opposed it of every intolerance of which it was guilty itself," added "if you want to ask Maura Lyons about that you will find her in a Convent somewhere."

Third appearance in court In 1959, after one more abortive appearance in court this time at Donaghadee in 1957, Paisley became involved in a court case with the Reverend Donald Soper, a peer and an exModerator of the Methodist Church in England. The case arose out of disturbances at Ballymena where a meeting addressed by Soper on August 1 had been interrupted by heckling, and a bible and a rosary being used as missiles to dislodge Soper from the platform. Leaflets had also been distributed condemning the speaker. The court case consisted of attacks by Paisley and his supporters on Soper for not believing in the Virgin Birth, to which Soper replied by calling them "intellectual rabbits." Paisley, Wylie and the Reverend H. V. McGowan, who were represented by Desmond Boal Q.C., were each fined five pounds. Paisley claimed he would have afforded Soper the right of free speech if he had come " as an infidel, not as a Christian minister." Paisley's main activities up to this point had been mainly directed at

---------------------CURRENT

AFFAIRS -------------------

__

liberal tendencies in the Protestant Communion. This had become a political consideration when Lord Brookeborough had failed to dismiss from the Unionist party the "radical element" represented by Bryan McGuinness and Sir Clarence Graham. In September 1959Paisley was himself considering standing for election in East Belfast, claiming that he had been approached by "a few influential people." However, later in the month he dropped this consideration and reverted to his old tack of protesting about tricolours, cribs, Nativity plays and the idolatrous celebration of such festivalsas Christmas and Good Friday. These festivities were not in keeping with" our protestantism." I am proud to say that my Church is one of the few that has no Serviceon Christmas Day." Paisley often gained publicity at this time by the bizarre nature of his protests, such as his encounter with Dr. McLeod whowas Head of the monastic Presbyterian Iona Community and was particularly distasteful to Mr. Paisley. The ex-Moderator of the Church of Scotland was addressing a meeting in October 1960, when Paisley and Wylie who were present charged him with "being out for unity with Rome." After the showingof a film in which the artistic works of the Iona Community were exhibited Paisley claimed he had seen a statue of the Virgin Mary in the exhibition. Bedlam broke out in the audience and one member commented that "it looked more like an atom bomb with a dove on top," to which Paisley rejoined that the film had been shown the wrong way round deliberatelyto confuse the audience. In the course of the 1960's the activities of the U.P.A. had become more definitely political. Desmond Boal wassupported in a general election in 1960. He was" a man who put protestantism first-not like those who become Protestants and Orangemen when they are lookingfor nomination," Paisley said at an election rally in his support. Paisley then added that Boal would take a harder line on domestic issues then Lord Brookeborough. A walk through blood It was at this time that Paisley developedhis great control of aphorism. At the meeting in support of Desmond Boalhe said" our Fathers went through blood, surely we can walk through snow." Later in Queens University he announced "this place is full of papishes," At the same meeting referring to the Pope he declared "I have hated God's enemies with a perfect hate." About this time Paisley's activities
12

began to upset the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church. Paisley challenged Dr. Austin Fulton, the Moderator, to substantiate in Court his claims that things were " going on in Northern Ireland which point to the existence of something not unlike a fascist movement" and that "within the ecclesiasticalsphere brave and bold demagogues would slander and libel in a fashion that is possible for them because there is little fear of legal action." Paisley took up this fascist charge and used it to describe Roman Catholicism, the I.R.A. and the World Council of Churches. In 1961 the Ecumenicalmovement becamethe main pre-occupation of Paisley and his supporters. Paisley was particularly disturbed that" the Archbishop of Canterbury had gone to swim in the unholy waters of Rome." First visit to the Vatican However it was not until August 1962 on the occasion of the opening of the VaticanCouncilthat Paisleymade his momentous visit to Rome. Claiming that his real protest was directed at Protestant ministers selling out to Popery on the Reformation, he added that the Pope could have as many Councils as he wished. However he did send a telegram to the Pope to inform him that his " claims and doctrines are contrary to the Word of God." Paisleywas followedaround in Rome by "guards of the Great Inquisition and by the Pope's Gestapo," and his distribution of leaflets and Italian language Bibles was intercepted by the Roman police. On his return to Belfast he was escorted to a police station and questioned, he organised a protest march to the Italian Consulate and the Belfast Telegraph, posters were stuck on B.B.C. saying" B.B.C. the Voice of Popery " and he released a colour film entitled "In the hands of the Pope's Gestapo." On June 4, 1963, the Union Jack on the City Hall was lowered on the death of Pope John XXIII. This provoked a protest march by Paisley and his followers. The march was banned and Paisleywas subsequently arrested under the Special Powers Act. This was the first occasion that this Act was used against a Loyalist parade. When Paisley refused to pay a fine of ten pounds, choosing to undergo the two months jail sentence instead, the fine was mysteriously paid for him. Later Paisley claimed that he had conclusive proof that the fine was paid by the Government and sent a telegram of gratitude to Captain O'Neill. From this period Paisley became an increasingly serious political figure in

Ireland. In the last five years while he has continued to agitate consistently about ecumenism and on religious issues his public demonstrations on non-religiousissues have assumed more and more importance. During the general electioncampaignof September 1964,Paisleydemanded that a tricolour flying from the Republican headquarters at Divis Street be removed. Shortly afterwards, James Kilfedder, the Unionist candidate in West Belfast, sent a telegram to Brian McConnell the Minister of Home Affairs, which said" Remove tricolour in Divis Street which is aimed to provoke and insult loyalists of Belfast." Paisley then announced a meeting at the City Hall, to be followed by a march. At exactly the same time the R.U.C. used pickaxes to break down the door of the Republican headquarters and seize the tricolour. Next day the tricolour was replaced and severe rioting began in Divis Street when the R.U.C. returned to remove the flag. This continued all night and thirty people had to receive urgent hospital treatment. On October 16th Kilfedder was elected with a 6,000 majority and proceeded to thank Ian Paisley "without whose help it could not have been done." Protest at cross-border meetings Next year saw the first of the crossborder meetings between O'Neill and Lemass. Paisley protested, carried on an extensive campaign and called for the removal of O'Neill from office fo, having betrayed the Ulster Constitution by meeting the Prime Minister of the Republic. Paisley formed the Ulster Constitution Defence Committee "so that the enemies of the province must see, by a massive outward demonstration, that Ulster Protestants would not surrender to Rome or the Republic, nor will they tolerate these betrayals by politicians or clergymen." About the same time he formed a personal bodyguard which was later to become the Ulster Volunteer Force and be disowned by Paisley. In 1966 Paisley reached a peak in prestige and popularity which he did not reach again until the second half of 1969, Through the first part of the year he campaigned for a ban to be imposed on all demonstrations marking the 50th anniversiary of the Easter Rising, which he called a " rebellion" and " a stab in the back for the Empire." This campaign failed and Paisley bitterly villified Captain O'Neill for" shaking hands with men who were covered in the blood of Britons." He claimed that "over Easter the soil of Ulster was desecrated by the rebels." (continued on page 7 7

--

----

-------------------CURRENT

AFFAIRS

The Phenomenon of Paisleyism

THE ANSWER to Paisley's rise in public favour lies, of course, to a large extent in his personality. But while every fascist movement similar to Paisleyism needs the dynamism and attraction of an intelligent demagogue, its source lies fundamentally in the political forces which give rise to the movement which the demagogue dominates. Paisleyism started as a purely religious phenomenon. It represented the reaction of Protestants to new developments in Ulster and in the world. In the early 1960s the Vatican radically altered the intransigent monolithic attitude it had consistently adopted in the twentieth century towards other Christian denominations and the secular world. This change was occasioned by a crisis in the Catholic Church which was revealed in the Vatican Council. In western Europe the number of practising Catholics had fallen to a tiny fraction of Church membership and in the Third World, a resurgence of national consciousness created great strains for a Church still relying on an alien, missionary clergy. This forced even conservative Bishops to face the evident contradiction between the absolute claims of Catholicism and its increasing lack of absolute power in the world. The documents of the Vatican Council were generally accepted as a genuine attempt by the Catholic Church to become more relevant and other Christians realised it had made the task of all the Churches a good deal easier. In the North, it was not seen as such by many Protestants. Already in October, 1962, Mr. Paisley was distributing anti-Papal pamphlets during the Council in Rome and in Naples. The Catholic Church remained strong in the North. While it was excluded by the State from spheres such as housing, business and higher education it remained in control of Catholic education and some allied social services. It still held a position of social and cultural controller of most Catholic communities, especially in rural areas. The Church still filled a political gap created by the weakness of the Nationalist opposition. Furthermore the sincerity of the Catholic hierarchy in accepting the thaw in Christian relations was validly questionable. section of the poorer working class and the small businessmen of Ulster had ensured the economic dominance of these groups over their respective Catholic counterparts. The ecumenical movement united the Protestant petty bourgeois and the unskilled working class. These groups quite erroneously believed that the ecumenical movement was a sign of the economic integration of Catholics. They saw their patronage in contracts, leases and rents and, for the working class, in jobs as gravely threatened. This was especially true of militantly Protestant areas in Belfast such as the Shankill. Many of its inhabitants worked in exclusively Protestant factories. Its shopkeepers depended on retaining an exclusive, highly Protestant community to keep a regular fund of customers in the face of supermarkets which radically undercut them. This reaction to ecumenism was greatly helped by two other factors. Many Protestant clergy openly accepted the ecumenical movement. They had never been Evangelical Protestants who believe in the classical Knoxian Calvinism which accepts the doctrine of individual " election" by God and the consequent damnation of all Catholics. But to the ordinary Protestant layman, the difference between a moderate Protestant theological stance and an Evangelical one was difficult to grasp. The ecumenical movement made the difference evident for the first time. Those who accepted ecumenism were selling out on their flock. The seriousness of the reaction to the ecumenical movement's acceptance by the Protestant Churches was clearly shown in 1965. Paisley led a march on the Presbyterian General Assembly which was being held in Belfast. On the way, there was a riot as the march passed through the Catholic Cromac Square area. At the Assembly building they clashed with the R.U.C. and abused the Governor of Northern Ireland who was attending the Assembly. The effect of this was such that the minister of Home Affairs, M. McConnell, who had permitted the march, was sacked in the following month. Working-class Protestants have always kept a sharp watch on their clergy and have a good deal of control in their appointment and removal. The clergyman is their class leader and is the head of the community, but they know he is economically dependent on his flock to live. Paisleyism, in this aspect, often occurred in nineteenth-century England as a revolt against the clergy. This revolt turned to another "elected" clerical demagogue as a substitute. Paisleyism has many of the facets of revivalism and is led by typical products of the revivalist fringe of the Churches. The acceptance of the ecumenical movement by the World Council of Churches and by all the main Protestant Churches in Ireland, except the Baptists, emphasised even further the difference between the local Churches in poorer areas and the general leadership.

Cross-Border Meetings
Another factor in the rise of Paisleyism was the cross-border meetings of the two premiers. This was occasioned by a need for economic co-operation between both states and by a need to moderate the demands of nationalism in an effort to attract foreign capital. It did not mean that the Unionist Tegime intended to give economic favours to Catholics in the North. It intended no such thing, but it was seen as such. O'Neill's softness on the South was linked in Paisleyite thinking to the Protestant Churches' softness on Papism. An element of nationalism was added by the international religious situation. Ulster was accepted by Paisleyites to be a last bastion of Protestantism in the face of a great, international sell-out which had pervaded even the Church of England. In 1967 Paisley called on " 100,000 Orangemen to protest against the Romanising Bishop of Ripon." Paisley has frequently attacked the Archbishop of Canterbury in London. In 1966 he tried to gain admission to Rome to protest at the meeting of Pope Paul and the Archbishop of Canterbury. Then he said "The Archbishop of Canterbury is a traitor. He has broken the Constitution and the Articles of Faith." This combined provincial nationalism and fears of an international conspiracy within Protestantism. Paisley's ideology is suitably smothered in charges of a sell-out on all formerly won privileges. In this way' Paisley has formed a powerful fascist ideology. Even in the religious sphere in its hostility to change and in its desire to retain former special privilege, it is psychologically suited to the Protestant shopkeepers, businessmen and workers
13

Anti - Ecumenism
It was at this time that Paisleyism developed. The Protestantism of a

----

- --~

~----

--------------------CURRENT

AFFAIRS--------------------

who did not gain from the economic growth of the North in the 1960s. The Unionists in times of crisis had extended patronage to Protestant clergy in order to encourage Protestants to attack Catholics. Before 1922, Cooke and Hanna had been encouraged by the Ulster landlords and businessmen to exacerbate sectarianism. This had the desired effect of making a united Ireland impossible. After Home Rule, they had encouraged clerical demagogues to provoke sectarian troubles to strengthen Unionist control at times of crisis. Paisley had no such encouragement.

Catholic labour, employing higher automation and by utilising foreign subsidiary units. This was especially true of the vast investment in Northern Ireland by Courtaulds which affected or took over many of the older Orange linen mills. The effects of foreign capital was to an extent offset by Unionist discriminatory economic policy. Genuinely attractive areas such as Derry and Newry which had cheap labour and little competition on the labour market were ignored. But by sending industry to Protestant towns, a huge divergence of interest between Protestant building

only have a good effect on the North. Martin Wallace of the Belfast Telegraph announced "he is not to be taken seriously as a political force." Perhaps he never was. He did not have the financial backing of huge landowners or capitalists. Television was equally hostile to him. But he had the full support of significant sections of the Protestant working class, and embittered manufacturers, farmers, disappointed Unionists, and a clutter of religious psychotics. He spoke a language which every Protestant knew. Professor Corkey, a Unionist Senator and ex-Moderator of

" I was followed around in Rome by the guards of the Great Inquisition and the Pope's Gestapo.'

" Harold Wilson is a tool of Cardinal Heenan and Cardinal Heenan is in the pay of the Pope."

" I think the blaspheming, cursing, spitting Roman scum were shown up in their true light. Immediately I arrived at the demonstration, this crowd of Roman Republicans from the South surrounded us."

The North's economy has expanded rapidly in the last decade. About 5,000 to 8,000 new jobs per year have been created through the construction of new factories. A large part of the annual subsidy has been used to give high investment grants to foreign industrial concerns. This means that for the employed working class, the 1960s have been successful and the interest of large capital had nothing to gain from sectarianism. Thus Unionism has toned down on sectarianism. Two groups, however, were badly hit by this industrial growth. Older Ulster factories were financially undercut. This was done by using cheap
14

contractors and manufacturers, was created. The second badly hit group suffered from a by-product of industrial growth. Higher industrial wages brought inflation. This caused a flight from the land in the western counties. British farm prices have not risen greatly in the sixties and most Protestant small farmers have suffered a drop in real income. Paisley was not encouraged by the state. He was jeered at, mocked and viciously lampooned by an incredulous press. On June 10, 1966, in an editorial, the Irish Independent found him so laughable, that it thought he could have

the Presbyterian Church, in attempting to attack Paisley, spoke a good deal of truth. He said, "His loud protestations of Protestant principles have attracted a considerable following of thoughtless people." He also spoke the language of Carson, Craigavon and Brookeborough. The Unionist state had indoctrinated, with every means at its disposal, the Protestant population for fifty years. When it jettisoned some of its bigotry in an expansionist era, it was not surprising that people continued to believe in what Paisley represented. Gerry Fitt summed this up when he said, "the biggest crime

that Paisley has committed, the cardinal sin which he has committed, is saying in public what a lot of Unionists think in private. He says it in a rather hostile, uncouth manner, but there are many supporters-many, many Unionists. "

Hitler did, his own calendar of events and ritual. He merely imitated the ritual of the Orange Order, and his chief demonstrations of strength were at protests, rather than at massings of his organised followers.

The Ulster Volunteer Force Hostile Press made him a world figure
Paisley also used the hostile press to his advantage. He quickly became a world figure, in which Ulstermen were proud. In countries where religion was not at the heart of political antagonisms his brand of religious racism was found to be ludicrous in the extreme. He got enormous publicity for comparatively insignificant acts, such as his visit to Geneva to protest at the Papal visit. He got similar publicity in Ulster. Every time he was lampooned, he grew in stature. These attacks served to emphasise the growing gap between the economic interests of a great deal of the middle classes and the rest of the Protestant community. Hitler in his day spoke of the racial beliefs of the same classes Paisley represents. Almost until he became Chancellor, the chief propaganda weapon used against him was ridicule. Ridicule is the lifeblood of fascism. Defensive groups do not like being laughed at. Paisleyism until well into 1968 was primarily an anti-ecumenical movement with political overtones. The political factors effecting change in the North were outside Paisley's and his supporters' understanding. They could attack when a sell-out appeared obvious. His potential political power was shown in September 1964. During an election campaign he threatened to lead a march on Divis Street to remove a Tricolour in the Republican Headquarters. He forced the Government to order its removal and started a vicious week of rioting in the Falls Road area and the burning of Catholic houses in the streets connecting Divis Street and Shankill Road. But until October 1968 at least Paisleyism remained an amorphous force. It lived on propaganda and its leadership of reaction. The Free Presbyterian Church did not define itself too closely either. Its membership grew from 1,000 in 1961 to 6,000 in 1966. But most of its members remained in other Churches and most of its congregations were outsiders. Paisley in his protest activity had no clear strategy. He merely followed religious and political events in the North and put forward a reactionary line. He never tried to create, as About 1964 he formed the Ulster Volunteer Force. This started as a private bodyguard of armed men who had to protect him at public meetings. Like most fascist personalities, Paisley is reputed to be a highly cowardly man. These thugs he recruited got out of hand very quickly. In June of the same year, John Scullion was killed by them. Later in the month, Andrew Kelly, Liam Doyle and Peter Ward were killed on the Shankill Road. Augustus Spence, Hugh McClean and John Williamson were found guilty of these murders. At the end of June, Mr. O'Neill banned the U.V.F. In August, the Protestant Telegraph claimed" Mr. Paisley has never advocated violence, has never been associated with the U.V.F. and has always opposed the hell-soaked liquor traffic which constituted the background to these murders." Before the advent of the C.R.A., the U.V.F. probably did not grow very much and it is difficult to discover Paisley's role in it. The same is true of the Ulster Constitution Defence Committee which Paisley publicly controls. Before 1968 it had about twelve branches in the North which spread across the Province. The fundamental problem affecting the easy growth of the Paisleyite movement is the lack of highly talented people involved in it. Ambitious people have firmly remained in the Orange Order and work through their local M.P. Ambitious clergymen similarly remain in the orthodox churches.

Major Bunting of the Loyal Citizens of Ulster, and Rev. John Wylie while Mr. Paisley was incarcerated, are rapidly displaced. With the advent of the C.RA., Paisleyism was the natural vanguard for reaction. It was the only properly publicised and organised fascist force. The Unionist Right were busy avoiding an open confrontation with O'Neillism before the North was in full reaction to the C.RA. It saw that Westminster could not allow an openly reactionary government to come to power. So it concentrated on ensuring confrontation between the C.R.A. and the RU.C. and in consolidating itself at a constituency level. The C.R.A. was an easier target for Paisley than ecumenism. His enemy was the more traditional republican and Catholic one. He linked this with his previous stances by claiming that the C.RA was a product of O'Neill's policies. A campaign could be launched which did not depend on infrequent visits from ecumenical ecclesiastics or occasional political windfalls. A regular, long term agitation led by Paisley was initiated with some startling successes, notably in Armagh, at Burntollet and in the general election.

The most influential leader of Protestant reaction

At the moment Paisley remains easily the most influential leader of Protestant reaction in the province. Militant Protestant forces are widely claimed by the opposition to be growing very rapidly. Paisley's personal control over these must be relatively weak. Most likely they are controlled by local Unionist bosses. Paisley could hardly control them in rural areas in the west, where the only viable Protestant organisations remain the Unionist Party and the Orange Order. But while Paisley may not control events organisationally, his influence cannot be underestimated. Paisleyism is now definitely the ideology of large sections of the Protestant masses. He has grown immeasurably in stature in the last year. The ridicule and hatred which he received from O'Neillism has made him popular in the conservative rural areas. He can attract bus loads of people from towns where he has no organisation to "lobby" Stormont. The Unionist Right wing must look to him as a man who can greatly help or hinder them in their political ambitions. They must also learn to speak the language which Paisley has drilled into Northern Protestants for a decade.

Paisleyism dwarfed by Paisley

In this way Paisleyism continues to be dwarfed by the figure of Ian Paisley. This is due to the debilitating effect on an extra parliamentary movement of the effective patronage which is still controlled by the Unionist party. With a relatively vicious power struggle taking place in the North at the moment, no really ambitious person could afford to be associated with Paisley, even if he flirted with him. Paisley probably approves of his position of leading a relatively talentless movement. Like most demagogues, he likes complete dominion over a movement. People who have for a while shared some of his publicity like

Was the August Pogrom

BELFAST has had many organised pogroms before August 1969 whose main aim has been to dispossess Catholics of their houses and jobs and to intimidate them to a point which will encourage emigration. The political advantages of a successful pogrom are obvious, one of the main fears of Protestants being the Catholic birthrate. Of course there are other political advantages for those who rally the people from the street comers by organising campaigns of looting, burning and intimidation. These local, small-time, shopkeeper politicians-such a one is John McKeague, chairman of the Shankill Defence Committee and owner of a pet-shop-gain much popular support by distributing among their minions the houses and jobs wrested from the Catholics. However the most important advantage to be gained from successful pogroms in the past has been the strengthening of the Unionist hegemony by the regeneration of the feuds upon which it is based. In previous pogroms there has never been any question of a split within the Unionist camp such as now exists. The ascendancy who have always ruled the party and who have agreed to concede reforms as the only realistic way of remaining in power, are viciously opposed by two powerful factions. These are the careerists and opportunists, such as Faulkner, on the one hand, and the solid block of right-wing anti-reformists, such as Craig, on the other. The so-called moderates have been strengthened by the North's reliance on British subsidy and foreign capital, which demand at least the semblances of moderation and harmony in the province. This demand is further reinforced by the presence of a Labour government in Britain which, unlike many of its Conservative predecessors, cannot be seen to tolerate the bashing of rebellious Fenians. Whereas the pogroms of 1922, 1935 and 1949 helped and sustained the

Planned?
Unionist Party and its aristocratic leadership, the recent campaign of terror has, ironically, weakened the party and precipitated the overthrow of the ascendancy. While the " moderates" remain the only faction that will satisfy Westminster, popular support, which now sees them as Lundies of the lowest order, has swung behind the right-wing within the party and the fascist rabble-rousers without. Local overlords have never had it so good.

History of Pogroms
In the nineteenth century Belfast suffered from the same kind of vicious, sectarian rioting which characterised most of the new industrial cities of Great Britain. Since 1886, however, this rioting has become political in function if not in content, and Belfast has remained since then a city admirably suited for pogroms. Unionist gerrymandering has kept the old electoral areas stable so that Belfast does not have the huge working-class housing

estates that usually surround a city of its size. The few housing estates that were built were tagged on to " safe " areas so that they would not upset the political balance. Thus a predominantly Catholic housing estate built in the Ardoyne area was situated right beside a traditionally Catholic area which includes Hooker Street, Herbert Street and an extensive part of the Crumlin Road. In the centre of the city old working class areas, which would have been knocked down ages ago in any other city, still stand. These contain ghettoes of different denominations situated urinervingly near each other and retain vivid memories of earlier sectarian rioting. Thus the Shankill Road area runs parallel to the Divis Street/Falls Road area and Duncairn Gardens parallels New Lodge Road. These hot-beds of enmity are broken only by shops and public houses which are often the first targets, while peripheral streets such as Dover Street, Townsend Street and Percy Street constitute the main battlegrounds for the mob fighting. Successive generations of pogroms serve to solidify the already existing sectarian divisions.

August pogroms carefully planned?

The pattern of the August rioting in Belfast points to the possibility that there were in fact carefully drawn up plans for a political pogrom. Earlier this year the city was comparatively peaceful. During a troubled period in April, the hand of the U.V.F. was seen by many observers in the destruction of the Kilkeel pipelines which provide Belfast with its water supply. These were destroyed in the heart of militant Paisleyite territory where no Catholic body, least of all the I.R.A., could have found cover or have avoided the police road blocks which were immediately erected. Besides, the I.R.A., which in recent years has always claimed responsibility for its exploits, denied that they were responsible. The evidence pointed to a co-ordinated effort by Protestant extremists. A possible plan might have been to raise tempers in Belfast by creating an atmosphere of suspicion reminiscent of the border campaign era, and, by depriving the city of its water supply, to pave the way for the uncontrollable burning of Catholic areas. If this was the plan it did not work, possibly for two reasons. Firstly the co-ordination between the rural Paisleyites, who presumably blew up the pipe-lines, and their urban counterparts may not have been adequate. Secondly, the people of Belfast had not

been riled or terrified by previous incidents to a pitch which would allow them be led on an invasion of Catholic areas. In the Belfast rioting which broke out at the beginning of August there was little evidence of organisation. On August 2nd a rumour spread that the Catholic inhabitants of Unity Walk Flats had stoned a Junior Orange Parade. The mob that instantly descended on the buildings found itself in open confrontation with the RUC who were attempting to give some protection to the flats. When the occupants came to the assistance of the police they found themselves at the receiving end of a vicious baton charge which penetrated the courtyards of the flats. Meanwhile a large Protestant mob took advantage of the preoccupation of the police by setting off along the Shankill Road on a rampage of looting. The charge that the whole thing had begun by the stoning of an Orange Parade was later denied by the head of the parade himself. The geographical position of Unity Walk Flats, which are perched at the end of the Shankill Road and are totally defenceless, makes it more likely that trouble began with some of the callous rumour-mongering which characterises Belfast. The subsequent unco-ordinated behaviour of the RUC especially in the Ardoyne area did little to help an already explosive situation. When a crowd of about a thousand assembled later that night in the predominantly Protestant Disraeli Street facing across the Crumlin Road into Hooker Street, the police, despite massive provocation, simply formed a human chain in an abortive effort to hold them back. They showed less restraint in dealing with the Hooker Street mob whom they attacked viciously with considerable help from Disraeli Street. The most serious casualty of this attack was an eighteen-year-old Neil Summers of Dunblayne Avenue who sustained injuries leading to amputation as result of being mowed down by a land-rover which then backed over him. Later on that night fighting broke out in Disraeli Street between Protestants and the RUC. This prompted John McKeague to tell Major Chichester-Clark, in " an informative meeting" between the Prime Minister, Major Bunting and the Chairman of the Shankill Defence Association, that although he considered the ordinary RUC to be a great force the Riot Squad had "ten black sheep to everyone white sheep." The complete absence of a strictly co-ordinated fascist plan was revealed

during the day by the reaction of the Protestant leaders to the looting of Protestant shops on the Shankill Road. Major Bunting and Ian Paisley had disagreed bitterly with John McKeague who supported the looting. McKeague clearly saw that it would consolidate the militancy of the area, while Paisley and Bunting saw that it would hinder the fundamental aims of the Protestant right-wing in the province as a whole. At 2 a.rn, McKeague showed the extent of his support in the area by persuading about 900 Protestants out of a crowd of a thousand to go home, shortly before they had stoned and boohed Bunting when he appealed to them by raising his hands in the air and pleading " in the name of God stop this and go home."

Split between McKeague and Paisley

The split between the militant, lumpen working-class mob element and the more political Protestant extremists representing the petty-bourgeoisie emerged fully two days later when Paisley issued a statement on behalf of the Ulster Constitution Defence Committee and the Ulster Protestant Volunteers, stating "that the Shankill Defence Association is in no way connected with them and John McKeague, Chairman, in no way represents either the views or politics of the movement." This statement (which establishes a clear connection between the U.C.D.C. and the U.P.V. or U.V.F.), shows that the' looting and rioting had been to a large extent spontaneous. This was not the case later in the month when prior organisation prevented such a split. If at this stage the rioting appeared spontaneous there immediately appeared signs that organisation for a pogrom was beginning in earnest. Catholics of Hooker Street had been very badly attacked. Few houses were left with windows intact. The people had been sufficiently frightened to send the children away for the first week in August. A public-house at the end of the road and a bookmakers on the Crumlin Road opposite Hooker Street had been burnt down. The R.U.C. had shown that they were capable of behaving as viciously East of the Bann as West of it. It was in this tense atmosphere that small time terrorisation against Protestants in Hooker Street began.

Skinny Lizzy burnt out

Most of the early terrorisation was drunken bloody-mindedness consisting mainly of throwing stones through windows. The Protestants believed that
17

this was escalated by two militant Catholic families, the Faulkners and the McGuinnesses, who had only recently moved into the area. At the same time a well known Protestant lady, Elizabeth Gilmore, locally known as "Skinny Lizzie," was burnt out of her house at the corner of Hooker Street and Chatham Street. She had flown a Union Jack from her parlour window since July 12 and had been threatened before the beginning of August. This had prompted her to declare to a press gathering "they will have to burn me out before I leave. No surrender." They burnt her out and she.surrendered, The Protestants in Hooker Street, in all seventeen families, moved out between the third and the tenth of August. One of these was the Beatty family of 35 Hooker Street. Mrs. Beatty, whose husband and daughter are both sufferingfrom the after-effects of serious operations, told us that she and her family had been increasingly terrorised by the local population. Stones were thrown through her front window and a person had to be restrained from throwing a petrol bomb

through her front window, but she received no specificor organised threat. Nevertheless, after a number of sleepless nights, listening to cat-calls and threatening sounds from the street Mrs. Beatty petitioned her Protestant friends to arrange a swop with a Catholic family in the Disraeli Street area. About the same time a Mr. J. Kelly whom we interviewed and who lived in 39 Palmer Streer was visited by a mob led by John McKeague claiming that two LR.A. men were known to be hiding in the house. This was an inaccurate description of Kelly's brother and a Protestant friend who were visiting him at the time. The R.U.C. later advised Kelly to do what he was told because " in this area what McKeague says goes." McKeague visited Kelly in his house a second time and advised him to get out. An easy swop was arranged with the Beatty family of Hooker Street. An interesting factor in this case was that the Hooker Street house was a rented one while the Palmer Street house was Kelly's own. At the moment the Kelly's live in a rented house un-

certain as whether or not the landlord intends to sell. Meanwhile Kelly's solicitor advises him not to take legal action to regain his own house in Palmer Street until things have cooled down. The solicitor's caution is founded on the case of a man who had been similarly driven from Columbia Street and whose solicitorshad served a possession order on the Protestants occupying his house. The family had moved out all right, but that night the house was destroyed by fire. This pattern was repeated, and the tenure of Protestants in dispossessed Catholic houses was ensured by the use of the petrol bomb. It appears that in the vast majority of cases the houses the Catholics left were their own while those vacated by the Protestants were rented. Another objective of the evictions was to arrange it so that Catholic streets would be attacked without danger to Protestants. The R.U.C. frequently claimed as in the case of Mr. Kelly, that they could not help the victimised families. Yet on August 6, when on a single day up to sixty Cath-

olic families were forced to move, Harold Wolsey, the Commissioner of Police in Belfast, blandly stated that "the police have full knowledge of reports that families are leaving their homes because of intimidation. It is absolute nonsense for people to say they are frightened."

Rapid organisation by Protestants

The tragic events of the pogrom in Belfast, which followed the victory of the Bogsiders in Derry, showed how well the Protestant militia had been organised in the period between August 6 and August 15. On this occasion the Catholics once more initiated the violence. On Thursday 14 in suicidal attempt to divert attention of the R.U.C. from the Bogside they attacked two Belfast police stations in Catholic areas. They were careful to avoid any dierct provocation of the Protestant population. However, Protestant fears had been greatly exacerbated by the mounting tension throughout the province. Paisley had played on Protestant fears by harping on the terrorisation of the Protestants in Hooker Street in virtually every speech he made. Furthermore the Bogsiders had defeated the R.U.C.inamosthumiliating manner. And the Protestant proletariat saw their world collapse in the face of a Fenian uprising. The amazing treatment of the Bogside riot by the Belfast Telegraph which mirrored ChichesterClarke's inane rantings about I.R.A. and Communist plots helped the Protestant extremist politicians to exploit these fears. When the Protestant mobs moved on this occasion they knew what they were doing. They did not attack Protestant shops. They attacked not in large spontaneous mobs but systematically on several fronts at the same time. In one night Protestants marched on the Clonard area in Springfield, on the Hooker Street area off the Crumlin Road and along about twelve fronts in the streets connecting the Shankill Road and Divis Street. On Hooker Street they burned out about fifteen houses. On more mixed streets they did not burn houses but drove Catholics to the end of the street and fought with them. Only Catholic houses were attacked. Leaders of the mobs carried maps denoting the religion of each householder, which were probably obtained from the electoral lists of Belfast Councillors. John McQuade M.P. and at least four Councillors led the advance while, the U.V.F. undoubtedly co-ordinated it. Two other significant factors can be cited to distinguish this pogrom from the spontaneous rioting earlier in the

month. During the course of the pogrom the R.U.C. were nowhere to be seen despite the fact that there were an estimated 1,000 policemen in the city. On the night of the killings a few policemen who accidentally came into contact with mobs quickly took themselves off. That the R.U.C. have ways of knowing what the Protestant rightwing is up to on occasions such as this has been well established by investigations into their role in the infamous Burntollet affair. On the night of August 15th the troops moved into Divis Street and the Falls Road Some people fought with them on Boundary Road while others continued the sniping which had been going on all day from houses around Clonard Monastery. In the chaotic fighting which took place in these areas the main weapons were petrol-bombs and shotguns. One soldier was shot in the face. While this fighting showed few signs of planning or order a mob that converged on the unprotected Crumlin Road were quite systematic in their burning of Catholic shops and houses. Two people were killed. The mobilisation of the Specials the previous day meant that weapons could be carried openly. However, the crowds were organised by non-uniformed people, presumably U.V.F. leaders. These issued instructions to all including the Specials, who were placed at the head of the crowd to provide some kind of visible leadership. After the first night it was clear that clashes with the troops were being carefully avoided. Instead two new strategies were adopted. The first was a firm consolidation of material gains made in the previous days. All streets which had been cleared of Catholics were filled up with homeless Protestant families. The confrontation with the troops which resulted in the use of tear-gas on an angry Protestant crowd, was sparked off when a Catholic family tried to reclaim their furniture from an occupied house. The second strategy was the erection of barricades to ensure that the new borders and the re-allocation of houses would not be upset by troop intervention. These " symbolic" barricades were also, of course, a challenge to the Government and an effort to maintain a high level of tension in Protestant areas.

yards. However, two large concerns, a brewery and a clothing factory, expelled all their Catholic employees en masse. There were numerous other instances of intimidation among British controlled factories. Instructions were given to Protestant managers to condone intimidation rather than allow a breakdown in production. Victimisation took many different forms. Catholic factory girls who had to pass through Sandy Row on their way to work were jeered and threatened. They were given an escort of B Specials who simply added to the jeering and threatening. This not surprisingly resulted in the girls absenting themselves from work. In other places hostile crowds assembled outside factory gates. In one instance they gave a hundred Catholic employees a choice between getting out or being thrown out. So while unemployment has increased in Catholic areas it has decreased in Protestant areas. An invidious instance of intimidation was the use of Radio Orange or Radio Ulster, run, it is claimed, by the Spence family of the Shankill Area, a member of which was involved in the U.V.F. murder of Peter Ward in 1966. The names and addresses of certain shop stewards were broadcast and Protestants were warned not to heed them since they had opposed victimisation. It does seem that very many Protestant shop stewards behaved in a highly courageous manner despite threats on their families and houses.

Pet Shop Burnt

A pet shop owner on the Shankill Road area who employed a Catholic manager was instructed by Radio Orange to sack him. His failure to do resulted in his shop being burnt to the ground and the roasting alive of 4,000 budgerigars and 600 worth of man-eating piranha fish. Only a crocodile survived the conflagration. Rather than attack British troops the Protestant extremists attempted to spread the disturbances to other, less well protected areas. John McKeague himself paid a visit to the Short Strand Road, near the Paisleyite Ballymacarret area. in the hope of stirring up some action on the other side of the Lagan. Despite the militancy of the neighbouring Newtownards Road McKeague was not very successful. In Duncairn Gardens the disseminators of disorder met with some success, though they had to wait till they were asked. Evidence of the source of the trouble in Duncairn was revealed late in September as a result of a dispute between a Catholic householder and a Protestant householder in the area. The
19

Job Victimisation
Job victimisation was not as widespread as in previous pogroms. The shipyards were not affected after the management had called a meeting of all workers and informed them that a pogrom would mean the end of British subsidy and the probable closure of the

original argument, which was of little importance as regards content, culminated in a threat that experienced arsonists from the Shankill Road would be brought in to burn the Catholic house. The next night the Catholic house in question was attacked by a mob of "outsiders" and burned to the ground while the buck was being passed from the Public Protection Authority to the R.U.C. and from the R.U.C. to the British Army. Since there is very little ideological difference between one working-class area and the next it would appear that trouble spots are those that have an organised leadership in the form of the U.C.D.C. and the U.P.V. Whereas the Shankill Road and Sandy Row are well organised other areas have less efficient, indigenous leadership and have consequently succumbed to the comforts provided by high employment and the Welfare State.

more popular support than any of the official politicians or clergy. Nor can there be much doubt that the Ulster Special Constabulary, most of whom are members of the U.V.F. are providing the weapons and knowhow for training new recruits. It is known that there are 67,000 guns going the rounds in the province, since there are that many licences issued to individual "sportsmen" and members of gun-clubs. The number of unlicensed guns in circulation is anybody's guess. Rumours that arms were coming in from the Continent through Belfast docks have not been verified. However, given the widespread support for the U.V.F. which exists both among

dockers and within the police force, it would be difficult for ChichesterClarke's government to prevent or even control such traffic. If any attempt is to be made to check the activities of the U.V.F. the government is going to have to rely on using the troops. Ironically the loyalty of the forces, especially the B Specials, which were originally designed to protect the mills and factories of the aristocracy against I.R.A. attack, is shifting to the right-wing middle-class leaders who protested most loudly when the arms of the Specials were being centralised. As the demands from Westminster continue the leadership finds itself more and more isolated.

" English Teague-lovers out"

The presence of troops is certainly a source of annoyance to the trouble makers. In Sandy Row this annoyance verges on hatred. Here the troops who collaborated with the Orange militia for fifty years, are seen as turncoats who are ousting the R.U.C. and threatening the Protestant right to economic privilege. The slogans in this area read" English and Teagues keep out" and "English Teague-Lovers Out." These slogans are significant since the people as well as their leaders know that the English connection can artificially impose a spurious liberalism, even if the province is in a state of wholesale fascist reaction. As a result coalition between the constitutional right-wing MPs and the leaders of the street militia is now an imminent possibility. As a consequence a Unilateral Declaration of Independence is still very much a live issue. Militant opposition to O'Neillism is veering towards a point of view which sees U.D.I. as the only way of preserving" Protestant Ulster." The term "Loyalist" does not figure as strongly in the Paisleyite jargon as it used to. The increased enlistment and training of the U.V.F. makes little sense except in the context of U.D.I. Since they were banned as a result of the Malvern Street murder in 1966 and changed their name from the Ulster Volunteed Force to the Ulster Protestant Volunteers, they have never involved such numbers as they do now. Through the Ulster Constitution Defence Committee they are controlled by Paisley, who undoubtedly commands
20

The Divided Opposition

THE CHARACTER of the opposition has changed very much since the General Election. Prior to then the Nationalists controlled the predominantly Catholicrural areas and in Belfast Labour was the main opposition party. But now the position is very much different. The Labour Party The Labour Party survived on the perilous support of the Paisleyite and Catholic workers. Before 1965Labour had held four seats. All four MPs had been Methodist lay preachers. In the 1965 election the Labour Party had lost two seats to moderate Unionists. In 1969 they were further debilitated. In Woodvale, which had been a Labour seat, the extreme PaisleyitemilitantJohn McQuadedramatically increased his lead over Labour to 6,791 from 3,351. In Shankill Labour, which had run the Paisleyite Desmond Boalvery closein 1965,came only third. Their proportion of the vote was halved. The Labour Party lost almost all support from the Protestant working class with the increasing success of Unionist fascism in Belfast. But Labour lost, not only the poor Protestant workers' vote, it lost the increasingly prosperous Protestant, skilled workers' vote also. In Victoria, the Unionist O'Neillite M.P., Roy Bradford, increased his majority over Labour from 423 to a huge 6,227, despite the participation of Major Bunting as a Protestant Unionist candidate. Labour had, in fact, hoped to gain a seat from the Unionists in Victoria, but the Protestant vote (and a section of the Catholic vote) polarised between Liberal-Conservatism and Fascism. The only Protestant Labour candidate to hold his seat was Simpson in the predominantly Catholic Old Park constituency. The other Labour victory was over Republican Labour. Paddy Devlin, a prominent Catholic C.R.A. man, beat the reluctant, aging Harry Diamond in a close and bitter contest. Labour lost the Protestant vote which it had been desperately trying to hold. In the election campaign they had gone out of their way to overstress the privilegeof the connectionwith Britain. British standards and British rights had been their slogan. They consciously
22

aimed at holding the Protestant vote rather than gaining any Catholic votes. The party executive was conservative and mainly Protestant. They allowed almost any compromise with Unionism rather than risk expose the party's flank to Constitutional argument. This had been particularly evident in Belfast Corporation where Labour is fairly strong. Councillors are allowed almost complete freedom from the party whip. A notorious exampleof this was the famous dispute over the opening of playgrounds on the Sabbath. Two Labour Councillors voted in favour of their continued closure and were not disciplined by the party. In this way the only non-Catholic opposition party was gravely shaken. The M.P.s who survived were both estranged from the party executive. Simpson reluctantly accepted that his vote was a pro-civil rights one and Devlin had used the party ticket merely to ensure his election in a strong working-classarea. The depth ofthe estrangementof the Labour M.P.s from the executive was shown during the Augustpogromwhenthe Labour party's vaccilatingattitude on what had happened so gravelyembarrassedPaddy Devlin with his constituents that he threatened resignation. The Nationalists The Nationalists were not wiped out. They retained six seats, one of which was not contested. In the other constituencies they nearly lost a seat to People's Democracy and in others lost a considerableportion of their vote to them. But from the inception of the C.R.A. as a radical anti-Unionist, street organisation they were always in serious danger on two counts. The first was that the clear lack of talent and leadership in the moribund, clericalist,petty bourgeois party would be exposed. This happened when the only significanturban vote west of the Bann rejected the Nationalists. The Derry Nationalists lost Gormley and McAteer. Only Austin Currie remained with enough talent to lead the party and he was unacceptable to the party executive. The second danger lay in the direct challenge to the Nationalists from the C.R.A. Before the election the decisions of the National Executive of the Nationalist Party had had great significance. This was shown by the

effect of their withdrawal from Stormont as official opposition and the importance for the C.R.A. of Nationalist support for their demands. When Hume and Cooper were elected, the Nationalist Party did not cease to function as a machine, but it lost nearly all its influence. Local C.RA.s became compromise amalgamations of the Nationalist party, the People's Democracy, Republicans and some representativesof Labour. The Nationalist Party Executive has met only a few times since February and the chief Nationalist M.P., Austin Currie, operates almost totally on a local basis in Dungannon. The New M.P.s The new M.P.s had nothing very much in common. Hume, Cooper, Devlin and Kennedy owed their election to the success of the C.RA. They had not been terribly influential figures before they received publicity from the confrontations with the government which took place at every turn of the C.RA. Hume and Cooper had defected from the Labour Party and won on an open C.RA. ticket. They received the backing of the Derry Citizens Defence Committee, while the official Labour Party candidate Eamonn McCann was outflanked. People such as Simpson or Carron recognised the dominance of the C.R A. but had no wish or capability to do anything except acquiesce in decisionstaken jointly by all opposition M.P.s. Currie had engaged fitfully in a squatting campaignprior to October 5. He had pushed the Nationalist party towards support for the C.RA. and had a powerful organisation in the heart of the most gerrymandered area of the North. He felt he had a natural right to lead any new party which might be formed. Gerry Fitt was, of course, an old hand. He had a group of Belfast Councillors under his control, a seat in Westminster and had led the first march in Derry when he had been batoned. He could not be left out of the picture. Neither could Paddy Devlin who was one of the most able of the opposition. He was, of course, comparativelynew to Stormont and some of the opposition unfairly considered him to be a careerist, Paddy O'Hanlon had been briefly associated with P.D. He did not, however, show more radical tendencies than any of the others.

The group was united on the basis of certain demands and little else. Austin Currie was always vociferous in calling for a united party, but it was probably never a likelihood. Since the General Election the main task of the opposition has been to filibuster the Public Order Bill. This campaign has shown the immensely complexposition the opposition M.P.s are in. Their allegianceis primarily to their local C.R.A. Thus they have used Stormont merely as a platform and have frequently walked out and have broken parliamentary procedure in almost every conceivablemanner. A clear example of this ambivalence was in the second week in August. The opposition successfully demanded the recall of Stormont, but when it met, they walked out immediately in protest at the mobilisation of the B Specials. Before August, the struggle for control of the local defence Committees was pretty intense. The M.P.s

had influence through exposure on the mass media. But people such as Paddy Doherty or Sean Keenan would have had at least as much influence as either Hume of Cooper. Local Defence Committees became the chief organisation in the North in the last two months. They are controlled by Republicans in Derry and Belfast. Republicans did not playa public role in the C.R.A., but now their strong local contacts mean that they are very much in power. Most opposition M.P.s acquiesce in this. Gerry Fitt, for instance, liaises between the authorities and the Dock residents. During the pogrom, a clear split emerged between the P.D., the Republicans and the parliamentary opposition. Sinn Fein and The Peoples Democracy Sinn Fein had alwaysbeen extremely hostile to P.D. The ideologists of the

Wolfe Tone Society disagreed fundamentally with P.D.'s line. They saw the C.R A. as a means of destroying sectarianism by attracting Protestant moderate and middle class support. P.D. hoped to effect the same change by radicalising the Catholic working class. Perhaps they were both wrong, but the dispute became more fundamental and bitter in August. At first in Free Belfast, P.D. had a good deal of influence They composed the first newssheets for the beseiged areas They were also in semi-control of the content on Radio Free Belfast. Then the Commissars from the South arrived and began to attack P.D. which had been calling for the abolition of Stormont. P.D. reasoned that with the imposition of direct rule from Westminster the whole Unionist machine would collapse when the easy flow of patronage dried up. Sinn Fein wasn't pleased. They denounced this line as Left Wing Adventurism and

instead called for the implementation of Article 75 of the Westminster Act and for the formation of a progressive bourgeois coalition government. The P.D. line was much more attractive and comprehensible to the people of Belfast, but Sinn Fein which had better organisation and a group disciplined to obey orders, won out.

mittees down the centre. By all accounts the decision to acquiesce in the fait accompli after Dr. Philbin's visit was a deeply disputed one. In other areas outside big urban centres the Catholic organisation has gone to ground. They are given no opportunity to meet and the Catholic population concentrate on avoiding a situation similar to Belfast in August.

The priest in politics

The priest reappeared in politics in Belfast. The priest provided a visible leader for a community which was often highly confused and nervous. The clergy wanted the barricades down as quickly as possible. The unannounced visit of Dr. Philbin split the people even further. He was abused and was visibly affected by the hostility shown to him by a few people. This dispute over the role of the priest split local defence com-

C.R.A.-Redundant?
The C.R.A. executive faces an enormous dilemma. It was held together by street demonstrations. Apart from that it had little cohesion. It cannot now hold meetings or protest marches. These have been banned until Christmas. The split between the Republicans and the P.D. is reflected on the C.R.A The Executive knows that if it did defy a ban on a march, people who took part

would be killed. They know, furthermore, that any such march in Derry will definitely be opposed by guns from now on. So to a large extent the C.R.A. is redundant. P.D. are emerging from the last two months in better shape than the rest of the opposition. They have cut themselves off from their student base just before the beginning of term in Queens. P.D. is now run by an executive committee. This was selfelected a few weeks ago, but will eventually be elected by the constitutionalised branches which P.D. is setting up all over the North. P.D. may also capitalise on the disillusionment felt by many Catholics in the I.R.A. This is felt particularly in areas like Ardoyne where the people feel they were deserted by the I.R.A. and felt by some republicans themselves in Divis Street who resented Southerners giving orders when they were fighting for their lives.

Unprepared to face fascist mobilisation

In general, the position of the opposition is gloomy. On the one hand they are hopelessly ill-prepared in the face of what Currie, Cooper and O'Hanlon claim is large-scale fascist mobilisation. On the other hand, they are completely helpless in their old role. Reforms now appear to be a matter of negotiation between Stormont and Westminster and not between the organised people and Stormont. The role of defending the Catholic population and safeguarding its interest has been forceably seized by the British army. Any remaining status Citizens Defence Committees have is due only to the indulgence of the army.

Oppositionovercome by events
In the last year the opposition has been as hopelessly divided as the Unionists. But the Unionists have the full force of the State to bide them over. They have the backing of a large middle class and an indulgent British government. The opposition has been overcome by the momentum of events which they set in motion. They have neither the resources or organisation. The opposition represents divergent class and economic interests and its attempt to unite them by attacking the Unionist State in the last year has finally eliminated any hope of a non-sectarian movement in the North in the near future.

THE CIVIL SERVANT has traditionally been a butt for humorists. It was easy to satirise the seemingly obsessive caution and avoidance of personal responsibility which the popular mind attributed to the civil servant, whose prime skills were represented as being a perverse pleasure in preventing members of the public from getting satisfaction and manipulation of files to keep the buck moving-together, of course, with an insatiable thirst for tea. The late Myles na gCopaleen imrnortalised one stereotype of the bicycle-clipped civil servant, who, through some unfortunate mischance in early life, had, to the disadvantage both of the public and himself, wandered from certain humble agricultural pursuits which were his true vocation. In recent years talk about the civil service has become more than a joke. There has been an increasing conviction both inside and outside Government that the traditional civil service organisation is for one reason or another not capable of carrying out the many complex tasks for which modern government - is responsible. One important indicator of this has been the large number of semi-state bodies and agencies set up by the Government outside the framework of the civil service to do jobs which Government felt the civil service itself could not do. There are now over eighty of these ranging from C.LE. and the E.S.B. employing between them some 30,000 to the Dublin Rheumatism Clinic

Association (15) or the Dental Board (1). This profusion of new bodies seemed to be growing in some areas into a duplicate civil service whose relation to the civil service proper and to the Oireachtas is obscure and to many people unsatisfactory. The Government, too, is showing some concern about this situation. In a famous speech Sean Lemass stated his desire to see all Government Departments transformed into development corporations. This had little practical impact at the time-it is easy to see from the Devlin Report why. Then in 1966 the Government appointed a committee under Mr. Liam St. John Devlin, "having regard to the growing responsibilities of government, to examine and report on the organisation of the Departments of State at the higher levels, including the appropriate distribution of functions as between both Departments themselves, and Departments and other bodies." This decision followed shortly after the appointment of the Fulton Commission in Britain to do the same job. The Devlin Committee has now published its report.

A hangover from" colonial period

The Report gives a fascinating insight into the reasons why the present civil servant structure is not delivering the results which modern government requires and sketches out a com-

prehensive and radical scheme for its reconstruction. The greatness of this Report is its absolute fearlessness in exposing astonishing weaknesses in existing arrangements and recommending radical solutions for them-its ultimate weakness as a practical programme may be an under-estimate of the fierce defence of the status quo likely to be mounted by what has been described as the country's stringent professional vested interest. In analysing the problem, the Report shows that in 1922 the new Government hammered together in a fairly rough and ready way a medley of official organisations which had grown up in Dublin over a long period of " colonial " rule. Except for the largely abortive Brennan Commission in the 1930s, no attempt has since been made to take an overall view of the kind of public service structure most suitable for Irish conditions. In recent years this makeshift has gradually been bogging down. Among the prime reasons for this, the Commission identifies the traditional concept of the Minister as "Corporation sole," that is, as the individual personally responsible in law for every act, however trivial, performed by a civil servant of his Department. Today the-sheer size of a Government Department makes it absolutely impossible for a Minister even to know about much that is done in his name. However, because of his personal responsibility, the whole way in which the
27

Department works is organised around elaborate safeguards to ensure that nothing is done which may embarrass him. One consequence is that even highly-paid senior officials often have little or no opportunity to use their own discretion or common sense in their work. They are surrounded by rigid rules. Every detail of what they do must be kept carefully recorded in the file so that, if anyone should query their action subsequently, it can be shown that they have acted completely within the rules. Over a period of years many or most civil servants become more concerned with keeping within the rules than with any positive initiative. Indeed it is often argued that the key to personal success for a civil servant is keeping out of trouble and that means avoiding difficult or controversial work. The Devlin Report tends to support this, since it shows that seniority is a major factor in promotion-you are more likely to lose a promotion for having done something wrong than to win one for brilliance.

Personnel standards falling

Comments on personnel policy are equally revealing. Apparently it is becoming harder and harder to recruit first-class people for the higher civil service, so that the top posts have to be filled by promotions from lower grades. This means that top positions will increasingly be held by people who have plodded their way upwards through a stultifying atmosphere calculated to knock all initiative and originality out of any but the most exceptional person-and those who enter the lower ranks initially are unlikely to be that. At a time when educational standards in the community generally are rising, those in the higher civil service are falling. The Committee actually suggests a bias in some Departments against higher education. New recruitment policies, the Committee says, are necessary. Incidentally, it remarks that "the use of the civil service alone as a means of promoting the Irish language diverts the service from its other tasks. A realistic language policy should be nation-wide in its application and if the civil service alone is required to make a knowledge of Irish a requirement on recruitment, it will be restricted in competition with other employers." Once recruited, pay increases and promotion follow for the civil servant fairly automatically, the speed of the latter depending more on what vacancies are available above him than on his own merit. The Committee is sceptical about arrangements for assessing personnel and performance and doubts whether the best people available are always promoted. Nor is there any proper system of manpower planning-foreseeing where particular kinds of people are going to be needed and providing for it well in advance. Most astonishing of all perhaps is the statement that when vacancies are being filled in Departments "there is no attempt to link qualifications to requirements and we found no evidence that in assigning new entrants, departments try to fit aptitudes and qualifications to the job . . . For the average officer . personnel development is a matter of chance." The silly requirement that women should retire from the service on marriage is also condemned.

Government policy, it is remarkable to be told that although "a number of Departments are conscious of the need for planning . . . they are neither adequately equipped, nor are they organised on any common basis for this purpose. It is hardly an exaggeration to say that this Report makes it clear that no national economic plan could succeed without a drastic overhaul of the public service. It is no credit to anybody that although the first national plan was launched more than ten years ago, we are still blundering along without the organisation machinery essential for such planning to be successful. Anyone who wants to know why the Second Programme collapsed and the Third is in jeopardy will find the answer here.

Control of details-neglect overall efficiency

of

Chaotic organisation
The Report analyses the weaknesses of the present civil service structure and operation under four main headings: organisation; personnel policy; planning and finance. On organisation, the Committee remarks that their first impression was that there is not one civil service, but sixteen; that each Department has its own service. It concludes that executive practice over the whole public service needs to be rationalised immediately. Civil servants themselves are classified into about a thousand different grades. The position is so confused that the Committee admits to difficulty in determining exactly what constitutes a grade. There is a further complication in that various groups of grades are regarded as "classes." This is to some extent a carry-over from the old concept of social class dating to the time when educational opportunity was related to social class. On the consequence of this, the Report says "the long hierarchical ladders that exist in all civil service organisations are a further impediment to the efficient discharge of business." Every officer must work under an officer immediately above him in the grading hierarchy. This means that where, for example, the work calls for one very senior man and a number of juniors, the senior man cannot have the juniors without having the appropriate number of in-between people as well.
28

Economic planning-impossible
At a time when economic planning has for some years been official

The Report's comments on financial control and management practices in the public service are devastating. "The system . . . was originally designed for the exercise of control by Parliament over expenditure by the King. It has not been adapted to provide an accounting service for a modern state." The whole system seems designed for rigid control of details-salaries, travelling, telephones and telegrams-while being uninterested in overall efficiency. As long as the sum of money spent for a particular item corresponds exactly with the amount authorised, then it is nobody's business to enquire any further. To put all the emphasis on controlling detail while not being concerned with general efficiency is an outstanding case of penny wise and pound foolish. Frequently this detailed control costs far more than it saves and meanwhile absolutely wrong attitudes to the proper use of public funds are imposed right through the service. It is significant in this connection that the Report says there is no overall plan for the development of automatic data processing in the service. The intelligent application of these techniques throughout the service would undoubtedly eliminate the need for a great deal of obsolete control of detail while providing safeguards against genuine misappropriation or dishonesty. Again, the Report says that the management accounting techniques developed in the business world have been given little place in the public service where the- main direction of the present system of Government accounting is towards accounting to the Oireachtas in detail for each item of expenditure

out of voted monies. This is another way of saying that as long as the file is kept right, nobody need bother about ultimate efficiency or results. In other comments on public service, organisation and management, the Committee talks about poor communications within the public service and with the public. Much of the traditional secrecy, it says, is unnecessary. Many civil servants have to work very hard and for longer than official hours, but much of this overwork is unnecessary and due to bad organisation.

New policy-making bodyAireacht

What is the answer? As already mentioned, the Report identifies as the prime cause of the problem the doctrine of" ministerial responsibility" and, in effect, it proposes to abolish this for a large part of the work of the public service. It suggests that the work of each Department be clearly divided into two functions-policymaking and overall supervision on the one hand and execution on the other. Policy-making responsibility would be given to the Minister and a group of top officials, to be known as an Aireacht, from the Irish word Aire-Minister. The Secretary of each Department would have reporting directly to him four staff groups concerned respectively with finance, planning, organisation and personnel. Also in the Aireacht would be Assistant Secretaries, each responsible for a particular functional area and having under them Executive Offices or Executive Agencies headed by Directors. These Executive Offices would have much the same kind of

freedom as is now enjoyed by the semi-state bodies. In -this way, much of the time-consuming detail which now occupies top officials would be dealt with at lower levels. The Committee describes this solution as combining the best features of the traditional civil service and the semi-state bodies. An important point here is that the existing semi-state bodies would come under more effective con-trol of their respective Departments in regard to policy and overall performance. One of the weaknesses of the present semi-state body system is that, once these bodies are launched, Departments seem to have very limited control over their policies and Parliament been even less. To alter the doctrine of ministerial responsibility in this way, changes in the present law would, of course, be necessary. It should be noted that while the officials in the Aireacht would maintain the traditional civil service anonymity, those in the executive offices would not. They would deal with the public in their own right under their own names in the same way as officials of semi-state bodies now do. In its sketch of the Aireacht, the Committee does not, I feel, emphasise enough the need for Ministers to have considerable personal discretion in selecting their top policy advisers. In this we have perhaps something to learn from the American system. While invariably the basic element in the Aireacht will be top civil servants, the system ought to be flexible enough to allow a Minister to draw into it, on a more or less temporary basis, outside advisers and experts whom he feels have a particular contribution to make. Ideally too, the Aireacht should dissolve

automatically when a new Minister is appointed so as to leave him free to select his own advisers. Departmental Secretaries might retire automatically with their Minister (without loss of pay and remaining eligible for reappointment). At levels other than the Aireacht, too, one cannot help feeling that much more flexible arrangements need to be introduced for bringing people into the public service at various levels from other occupations-and at the same time making it easier for public servants to spend part of their careers in outside employment. This would give the public service a badly-needed leavening of people with practical experience of what goes on on the other side of the fence. Devlin does suggest changes in the pension system to make it easier for civil servants to go out, but doesn't give much attention to how to bring others in.

Oireachtas Committees
While the public service relationship to the Oireachtas was outside the Committee's terms of reference, it is very relevant to this discussion. The case for Oireachtas Committees on various topics is very strong, since it has now become impossible for Parliament to deal effectively with much of its business in the traditional general-type discussions. If this reform takes place, then the relationship between the Oireachtas Committee and the appropriate Aireacht should be very close, with, for example, officials of the Aireacht being available to the Oireachtas Committee to discuss policy areas with which they were concerned. It is
29'

extremely important that as the Devlin recommendations are implemented, a parallel development of Oireachtas institutions also takes place, so that public representatives continue to participate effectively in policy development. While the Report very rightly condemns some of the present forms of parliamentary control as being obsolete and ineffective, these must be replaced by an effective relationship between Parliament and the public service if the democratic principle is to be protected.

New Public Service Department

How does the Devlin Committee suggest that the serious organisation and management defects of the public service be cured? The key proposal is the setting up of a new Public Service Department with its own secretary reporting directly to the Minister for Finance. This new Department would be responsible for introducing modern management systems throughout the public service. It would build up a group of management specialists and work through the assistant secretary for organisation in each departmental Aireacht. It would organise proper training for civil servants (said to be virtually nonexistent at present). It would generally have responsibility for implementing the Devlin Committee's recommendations. The Report says the present system of financial control should be scrapped over a period and instead the public service should go over to a " planning, programming, budgeting" system. The concept calls for the change from the system of appropriations by items of expenditure to appropriations by programmes, with a sophisticated evaluation of alternatives by cost effectiveness and cost utility measurement techniques. In other words, budgets for apparently desirable projects or programmes would be prepared by Government departments. These would go to the Department of Finance which would be responsible for national planning and would assess each department's proposals in the light of overall national objectives. Once a departmental programme had been approved and the appropriate budget allocated to it the Department concerned would itself be responsible for detailed control. The Department of Finance would no longer be responsible for checking the "housekeeping" accounts, but would be concerned with how well progress was being made towards the stated goals and the overall efficiency of the Department's performance. In
30

each departmental Aireacht a planning group working with the Secretary would be developing future plans. On the personnel side, the Committee recommends major simplification of grades and classes and the basis of merit alone-such posts to be open to properly qualified officials in any part of the public service, not just those in the same Department. Here again I think at least some of these posts should be open to people from outside the service. It is clear that the building up of a really strong Public Service Department would be essential if these new systems are to be implemented. An important suggestion regarding the semi-state bodies and state companies is that in future the commercial ones should operate on a normal commercial basis/ i.e., make a profit. Where the Government expects these bodies to fulfil loss-making "social" functions, the cost of these social services should be charged separately to the Government and presumably (although the report does not say this) voted as a subsidy by the Oireachtas. This would be a valuable advance on the present position when nobody knows in many cases exactly what the losses of state companies are being incurred on and whether or not the expenditure is worth while. If each loss-making item had to be justified to the Oireachtas, it would impose a valuable discipline and many wasteful activities would be eliminated.

transfers of Departments and Education.

of Land

2. De-concentration, which involves a delegation of executive functions to a number of departmental centres throughout the country as in the recent suggestion by the Minister for Agriculture that there should be a mini-Department in each county. 3. Devolution which involves a transfer of departmental functions to regional or local bodies. The first of these does not involve the decentralisation of authority to take decisions. The other two do. For effective decentralisation, the natural sequences is in the first instance the decentralisation of decision-making followed by the relocation of people." The point is strongly made that the top advisers in a department must be in the capital near Parliament and their minister. If on the other hand, responsibility for routine decisions and executive work is delegated to lower levels in the public service, as the Report recommends, then there would be numerous opportunities for establishing local branches of Departments in various parts of the country. The Report looks to the ultimate coordination of all public services in regions with presumably a unified administrative centre for each region. In a signed addendum to the Report Mr. T. J. Barrington, Director of the Institute of Public Administration, discusses a number of valuable ideas for de-concentration and decentralisation.

Local Government and decentralisation

I have not so far said anything about Local Government. Strictly speaking, this is outside the Committee's terms of reference. They say, however, that they had to consider the relationship between Government departments and local bodies. What they recommend, in brief, is that local bodies should enjoy much greater autonomy within their delegated area of responsibility. This would relieve them of a great deal of detailed and irritating interference and control from the central government and restore the opportunity for local initiative which has been very seriously eroded in recent times. The Committee's Report also implies support for progressive regionalisation of public services. It slyly condemns the proposed moving of Government departments to Athlone and Castle bar in this summary of its attitude to decentralisation which makes admirable sense. "There are three recognised methods of decentralisation. 1. The dispersal of centralised units of government as in the proposed

Haughey's problem now

This is an exciting Report, of fundamental importance for our national future. The question now is what will be done with it. The Committee itself calculates that it would take at leave five years to implement its proposals-starting now. It could very likely take ten or more. Will anybody be prepared to take on this tremendous challenge? All eyes are now on the Minister for Finance. It is under him that the new Public Service Department would be formed. It is, perhaps, a fortunate coincidence that the present holder of the office, Mr. Haughey, is widely recognised as having the personal qualities-the exceptional ability and deep determination-which would be essential for the task Devlin outlines. Mr. Haughey now has an opportunity of a kind that even outstanding politicians rarely get: to associate his name with the construction of a new Irish public service which could serve as a model,

not only to Europe, but to the world. The smallness of the Irish community makes such a task feasible here, where it would be unmanageable in larger societies. By devoting himself to this project for the next five years Mr. Haughey would be taking the most effective steps possible to promote national development because one of the facts which comes through again and again from Devlin is that without effective organisation and management in the public service a great deal of Government policy and planning must be abortive. One must not under-estimate the very real difficulties which Mr. Haughey would face. One of these is already apparent in the cagey, lukewarm response of the Government to the Report's publication. Fianna Fail have just had a convincing win at the polls which can legitimately be taken by the Government as an endorsement of the status quo in this, as in many other fields. Ministers who have been working for years with particular departments in a particular way will be slow to embark on a radical programme of this kind which might upset their civil servants and would certainly interfere with traditional forms of political patronage and influence, e.g, the Post Office. Furthermore, the system of appeals to independent tribunals for citizens feeling aggrieved by departmental decisions may be seen by some Ministers as involving important loss of control. Despite this absurdity of the doctrine of "ministerial responsibility" in modern conditions, some Ministers like being a "corporation sole" and wouldn't relish the thought of having their area of direct responsibility reduced to the Aireacht enclave. Some people in fact would argue for

a very much more radical approach to public accountability than Devlin proposes - something similar to the Swedish system where every citizen has free access to any public service file or an Institute of Criticism existing purely to correct defects in the public service from the citizens' point of view. Caution is necessary in transferring such ideas to Ireland, where they could have an opposite effect to that desired. One of the criticisms of the present system which Devlin stresses is the obsession with detailed accountability-keeping the file fully prepared against any conceivable query. Our present need is to moderate this so as to encourage more initiative and personal responsibility. To expose the public servant to even greater detailed accountability in the future would not help. I feel that if the system of administrative tribunals headed by a Commissioner for Administrative Justice is implemented, it will go a long way to safeguarding the citizen's rights. Opposition to Report

Another major problem in implementation will be to preserve the unity of the Devlin Committee's conception. Already Government departments and semi-state bodies are getting ready to fight detailed recommendations about themselves which they don't like. Obviously, the Government's first step has been to call for memoranda from each department on the Report. This is the traditional start to the smothering process. If the result of such activity were a kind of half-implementation of Devlin, then our last state might be worse than our first. Again, if Mr. Haughey does wholeheartedly take up

the challenge, who will he find as Secretary for the new Department of the Public Service? Most senior civil servants have been so moulded by traditional attitudes and tactics as to be overwhelmed by 15 Government departments and an assortment of state agencies arguing vigorously to preserve a particular part of the status quo which they believe important to them. An appointment from outside the public service altogether may be necessary. Perhaps what is needed is a prestigious manager, possibly from abroad. In this article I have deliberately avoided discussing the detailed recommendations made in the Report for each Department. Certain of these I did not agree with. However, these detailed recommendations must be regarded as "for examples." If the fundamental recommendations are accepted, then there will be no problem in adjusting these details in line with what are very clearly stated principles. What must be avoided at all costs is the obscuring of the basic recommendations by argument about peripheral details. This is a classic way of gutting uncomfortable proposals. The Devlin Committee firmly rejects resort to easier short-term palliatives which, it says, will provide no long-term solution. "The structures and systems we propose are part of an interlocking and unitary concept and, unless the whole concept is put into effect through carefully programmed stages, the results we envisage will not be obtained." The decision which the Government faces is whether to accept that statement and implement the Report or muddle on, putting off the evil hour in the hope that what has done them well enough for more than thirty years can be made to do for a few years yet.

BRITAIN'S
I WAS AT a dinner party the other night with some friends of mine who had been eager Labour Party campaign workers in the 1964 election and who had sweated for months to usher in the new dawn of the technological revolution then promised by Harold Wilson. Naturally, I twitted them with the present chaos of the Labour government and the widely accepted certainty of a Conservative administration after the next election. None of them were much disposed to argue the matter for, even if they could see the prospect of economic recovery in time to give the Prime Minister another term, they could not themselves muster up any particular conviction that a new Wilson government would be more idealistic, more centrally concerned with the priorities of social justice which have historically animated the Labour movement, than the old one. Not that any of my friends were likely to vote Tory. It seemed, indeed, that we had a typical group of serious, intelligent Labour abstainers of the kind who are currently giving Transport House officials nightmares; until one of the company suddenly said: "I can't get very worked up about another Labour government, but I'm convinced of the vital necessity for another Labour parliament and I'll work and vote for that."

NEW MORALITY
Censorship of the cinema, which works by a system of grading films for certain audience age groups, has been made nonsensical by the inconsistent licensing policies of different local authorities, which bodies in Britain control what appears in the local cinema.

Unique expansion in the freedom of the individual

He went on to justify this thesis. Always a free country (he said), Britain had seen, since 1964, a unique expansion in the freedom of the individual to conduct his own life as he wished and to order and govern the morality of his conduct according to prejudices and inclinations of his own, rather than society's, choosing. In comparison with that, it meant little that increased taxation, an economic squeeze and the growth of bureaucracy had limited the individual's economic power, for such economic limitations as there had been were not yet significant. The standard of living in Britain, though not rising, had not fallen; house mortgages, though difficult to obtain, were not
32

beyond reach, and there was even evidence that the pressures of the market were about to cause a slump in property values which would make buying one's own home a much easier business. Put roughly, one might say that, for the private consumer, the economic situation is at a standstill. On the other hand, in vital areas of private life, and in large questions of morality, politics has been moving with speed and revolutionary effectiveness. During the life of the present Labour government, capital punishment has been abolished for a trial period of five years and, as long as there is a Labour majority in parliament, that abolition will stand. It is now possible for homosexuals to make love without fear of a law, now abolished, that had hitherto been administered in a patchy, arbitrary and often cruel fashion. Pregnant women who, for a variety of reasons, do not want to have their babies-as that they may have been victims of rape, or may suffer grievous mental or physical stress by giving birth-may obtain abortions under an efficient, medically reliable system which has very largely replaced the old scheme of things in which dangerous back-street abortions were order of the day for the poor, while the rich flew to Swiss clinics. Divorce will soon be easier: as a result of impending legislation it will be possible to obtain a divorce either because both parties agree that their marriage has broken down or because divorce is requested by one partner after a separation of five years, whereas before, adultery or a complex combination of cruelty and desertion were the only grounds for breaking up a marriage. The Lord Chamberlain, who, hitherto, could prevent the performance of plays which he found undesirable in commercial theatres, or at least require substantial alterations in their scripts, has had his powers taken away from him. Though soft drugs-like cannabis and marijuana-are not yet legal in Britain, there is a powerful lobby of intellectuals and men of culture determined to make them so. The Arts Council has recommended that the remaining legislation against obscenity in literature should be dispensed with.

Intense Public Debate

These and many other changes in the social and cultural map of Britain have taken place in the last five years. Taken in sum they have two features. Firstly, each one of these issues has taken place against the background of an intense public debate about the nature of contemporary mortality, about what ought to be allowed and about how much freedom the individual has or ought to have to indulge his tastes and prejudices. Thus we have had Mr. David Steel doing battle for more liberal abortion laws against Mr. St. John Stevas, the guardian, in this, as in other respects, of the traditional morality. And we have had Mr. Kenneth Alsop (one among many notable advocates) fighting out in relation to its influence on readers the issue of pornography against the conservative tenets of Miss Pamela Hansford Johnson (again, one among many notable advocates). But, from the point of view of politics, the second feature of the way in which the moral map of Britain is being changed is even more interesting. Most of the features of what the Guardian first called the permissive society (which prompted one reader to write and ask how she could join) have been created by parliamentary legislation. Not, of course, legislation initiated by the government, but legislation brought into being by means of the Private Member's Bill.

Role of Private Members

The Westminster parliament, to a degree unequalled in any country enjoying representative institutions, allows its members to initiate and carry through to the statute book an immense quantity of legislation on which the leadership of both parties takes a

neutral attitude. There is a curious and unwritten convention by which the spheres of government and private members are delimited. No British government would allow a private member to bring forward with any chance of success legislation which in any way impeded its own policies or programme of government. Thus it has happened that while the government controls what happens in the great spheres of economics, education and the social services, the private members control what happens in legislation regarding morality and the conduct of of the individual's private life. In many ways, on the face of it, this seems highly desirable. It means that the authoritarian hand of the State, the government (and even the Opposition) is not much felt in those spheres of legislative activity relating to private life and that, conversely, in these matters the weight of the opinion of the individual, the private member of parliament, is felt most strongly. But this is to give a very superficial description of what happens. Several qualifying observations ought, indeed, to be made on the spate of liberalising (or permissive, depending on your point of view) legislation which we have seen since 1964. First, it ought to be said that relatively few members attend the House when private members' business is being discussed. Thus the new legislation cannot be said to command the support of a majority of the whole House. Secondly, while the government stands or falls at each general election by the electorate's verdict on its total direction of policy, private members initiating new legislation rarely have to concern themselves overmuch with the wishes of the majority of the people in respect of the actions they favour. The new legislation, therefore, is brought into being without a popular mandate, with, at most, the tacit consent of the government, and by a select and energetic body of M.P .s,

aspects of the permissive society. There can be no doubt either that the principal general feature of Private Members' legislation since 1964 has been to increase the freedom of the individual at the expense of the ordained coherence of society. That, indeed, is its principal justification. The effect of the new legislation on the character of British society is debatable, but generally agreed to be significant. It has, however, another feature to which I am anxious to draw

which affect the lives of millions, in return for complete independence to decide what is in the interests of hundreds of thousands of the intellectual middle class. For, make no mistake about it, progressive legislation goes forward on the basis of an alliance between its proponents and the government on a much more practical level than the convention that private members legislate for the sphere of private morality. The Divorce Bill, the Abortion Bill and other re-

Only possible with Labour

majority
-I am not concerned for the moment with whether the new legislation is desirable or undesirable (though I myself would have opposed all of it with the exception of the new Divorce Bill) ; I am only anxious to show how it came to life. There can, moreover, be no doubt that such legislation can only come to pass when there is a Labour majority in Parliament, for it is in the Labour party that you find the liberal moralists. A Tory majority would silently and without bothering to argue too much about it, vote down almost all

attention, which has been under-estimated by its proponents. It is predominantly legislation in the interests of the intellectual middle class. Its advocates have. been those members of parliament most generally and frequently associated with the progressive wing of the Labour Party and its supporters are very largely to be found among the high university intake of Labour members in 1966. What I want to suggest is that these progressive members of the Labour Party acquiesce in the arrangement by which the government decides what can be done in large, important areas of social policy, like housing and the Welfare' State,

forming legislation could not have been passed unless the government gave up some of its own parliamentary time for debate. And Mr. Roy Jenkins, both when he was Home Secretary and since he has become Chancellor of the Exchequer, has given broad sustenance to the efforts of the reformers engaged in the brick by brick construction of the permissive society, the influence of which, he has said publicly, will be both civilising and humane.

Damage to Labour Movement

Mr. Jenkins may well be right. On the other hand, I believe it is demons33

trable that the success of reforming legislation in the sphere of private morality has damaged the Labour movement even more than the government's performance in handling the national economy. Let me try to illustrate this. The government have introduced into parliament a new bill dealing with children and young offenders. One of the features of that bill is that home background will be taken into account in deciding whether a child under the age of sixteen, who is delinquent, will have to appear before a court or not. Self evidently, middle-

he made clear his belief that it had been taken over by university intellectuals, that it had become alienated from " my kind of people." Since he has become Home Secretary Mr. Callaghan has recognised this danger of alienating a Labour parliament from its grass roots. A former parliamentary adviser to the Police Federation (the policeman's trade union), he has opposed liberalising drug legislation and all further advances down the road to the permissive society against the Cabinet advocacy of two of the most intellectually distinguished members of the Labour party, Mr.

basis and substance on which people take their stand about what is important to them. Both British political parties are curious amalgams of opposites. The amalgam in the Labour party has traditionally consisted of an alliance between high-powered intellectuals with a social conscience and the underprivileged working class. As time has gone by, as the high-powered intellectuals have become more highpowered, and as the Wilson government has discovered that, given the achievement of the Atlee government in social legislation, they cannot do significantly better for the poor and the underprivileged than a sympathetic Tory government, the best minds of the Labour party have turned to other causes, notably their own intellectual and cultural causes. Not that all these causes are concerned with culture as traditionally understood: but they are all supported with philosophic arguments-like the freedom of the individual to run his own life-which are incomprehensible to the working classes who have traditionally put their trust in Labour. In the present political climate, both the Liberal and Conservative partices recognise that the problem of the homeless is one concerned essentially with all those families who do not have adequate accommodation. Only the Labour government defines "homeless" as meaning those actually without a rented or owned roof over their heads. Yet no protest has come from the Labour back benches: that is the crisis of morale the Labour party has to face.

class children will rarely appear in court; self evidently, the children of the working class, and particularly of the poor, will appear before the courts with increasing regularity. In other words, class is an advantage to a child accused of crime. In opposition it has fallen to the Tories-supposedly themselves the party of class-to point out this danger to the bill, and to oppose it for this among other reasons. Though some Labour backbenchers have joined in that protest, the best and most gifted of the younger backbenchers have been too busy doing other things, like reforming the laws on abortion, homosexuality and divorce. Again, I would like to point out that I am making no judgement on the merits of progressive legislation: I am simply saying that its priorities are not the priorities of the Labour movement. Indeed, one could go further and say that progressive legislation is downright unpopular with the working class Labour voter. When Mr. Ray Gunter resigned from the Wilson government,
34

Jenkins and Mr. Crossman, the Minister of Social Security. He has become convinced that, to save its life, the Labour government must renew its alliance with the working classes and the economically underprivileged and forswear its attachment to what he privately describes as merry-go-rounds for the intellectual middle-classes.

Ideal Government-Moderate Tory with strong Labour Opposition

It is not a crisis they face alone, for the whole country faces it with them. Mr. Crossman, in one of his highly objective moments (before he became a Minister), said that the ideal system of government for Britain was a moderate Tory government, with a small majority and a powerful Labour Opposition. Only thus, he argued, could the priorities of stable and economically successful rule be combined with pressure for social reform and increasingly adequate social services. Nowadays the brightest hopes of the Labour Party-like my friends at the dinner party-give their best energies over to minority legislation and abandon their hopes for influencing the government on social issues of majority and national importance. It imposes a tremendous burden on the liberals of the Conservative party, and an even greater burden on the Liberals, which neither may be worthy of. It is nothing less than the abdication by a generation of its responsibilities.

Tories will preclude progressive Legislation

In all this there is a very serious debate about the nature of society, the direction in which it ought to move and the proper place for parliament in deciding on that direction. If present opinion poll trends held fair, and the Tory party was returned with a massive majority at the next election, there would, of course, be an end to the debate, for such a Tory majority would foreclose on all progressive legislation in the field of morals. What is at issue here, however, is not the vagaries and chances of democratic policies, but the

THE ARAB-ISRAEL
AFTER THE FALL of the Jewish state of Palestine in the year 70, up to the fateful year of 1948 only two Jewish states were ever formed. One was in the Yemen in the sixth century and the other was on the Lower Volga and lasted for three centuries until 1000. During the Middle Ages Jews had formed tight, closely knit communities. But in the nineteenth century the movement towards cultural assimilation became much greater. Then in 1879 a tragic event took place. Bismarck for completely pragmatic reasons found it necessary to launch a campaign of anti-Semitism. This cynical use of pogroms by rulers was to continue in Austria, France and Russia. Thus in a century in which bourgeois nationalism developed all over Europe rulers exorcised many of the class hatreds and tensions by forcing a new political identity on international Jewry. A Jewish reaction to anti-Semitism was the nationalist and socialist ideology of the Bund, the Jewish Socialist Party of the Russian Empire, founded in 1897. Another reaction was that of Theodor Herzl. He wrote A Jewish State in 1896. In this he formulated the theory of a homeland which would be a refuge for the migratory Jew. Palestine was the obvious centre for this new homeland. This was still .part of the rapidly disintegrating 'Ottoman Empire.

CONFLICT
Hitler's pogroms
Hitler's organised pogroms unleashed further waves which the British encouraged under the guise of an anti-fascist policy. Between 1932 and 1938 217,000 Jews entered Palestine. By 1939 Jews numbered 429,605 out of a population of about 1,500,000 or about 28 per cent. The Arab reaction to this was extremely hostile. They saw a privileged class being deliberately created by Britain. Jews controlled nearly all of Palestine capital; were autonomous and self-governing and had a powerful purely Jewish Histradruth or Trade Union Congress which fulfilled the functions of insurance, banking and social security for the Jews. This Histradruth was the source of the peculiarly capitalist Labour Party in Israel. The Arabs used strikes, demonstrations and terrorism in an attempt to save their territory. The British used an army of 10,000 to crush these revolts and organised a force which was to finally hurt the British themselves. This was the Haganah, a vicious brutal, secret Jewish army. In 1945 when all the world's attention was being transfixed by the horrors discovered during the allied armies' liberation of the concentration camps in Germany, war broke out again in Palestine. The Jewish racialists in Palestine now had powerful allies. They had the sympathy of a quiescent, guilty European people, the organised in35

Small Jewish colonies

Small Jewish colonies still existed in Palestine where in 1880 there were

24,000 Jews. This number was to grow with the increase of antiSemitism, particularly in Tsarist Russia. Most Jews emigrated westwards to the U.S.A. often staying for a period in Western Europe to pay for their passage. But some went to Palestine. By 1914 Jews comprised 85,000 out of an indigenous population of 739,000. Then in the same year the huge, shaky, bureaucratically inept Ottoman Empire entered the World War on the side of Germany. A new stage had opened. The Empire collapsed. Many Arab States demanded independence. But in May, 1919, the Colonial Allied powers characteristically ignoring the claims of the indigenous population announced a different decision. They decided to bestow "mandates," which was a hypocritical formula for a colonial territorial extension, on the victorious capitalist powers. Syria and Lebanon were taken by the French, and Iraq and Palestine by the British. The colonising powers, facing constant smouldering revolt, used the policy of divide and rule. They gave special privilege to a racial minority which would thus be loyal. This created a state which had an efficient bureaucracy and which remained loyal to the colonial power without openly infringing on the mandate status of the country. Britain thus encouraged Jewish emigration to Palestine. Between 1919 and 1931 another 117,000 Jews entered Palestine.

-------------------CURRENT

AFFAIRS---------------

fluence of many Jewish capitalists in the U.S.A. and their own well-equipped army. In 1947 Britain pulled out and handed the problem they had cynically created to the United Nations. The U.N. decreed the partition of the state into a Jewish and Arab sector. Guerrilla warfare raged in Palestine. The Jews accepted their allotment of territory and immediately used it as a base for expansion into the Arab sector.

A Jewish state
The Zionists had achieved their desires. They had a Jewish state. Numerical superiority was achieved by driving out 580,000 Arabs who still remain in refugee camps. Before 1967 they numbered 922,000 due to their high birth rate. Jews were encouraged to " return to Israel." Arabs to qualify for citizenship had to swear an Oath of Loyalty to the State of Israel. Between 1948 and 1951, 687,000 new Jewish immigrants arrived mainly from Eastern Europe. 330,000 of these were Asian and African Jews. These were to create an intense racial and ideological crisis in Israel which in some ways is an explanation of the 1967 war. By 1956 there were 1,667,500 Jews and only 200,000 Arabs in Palestine. The Arabs refused to recognise this European diktat or to recognise the easy assimilation of migrants fleeing the social problems created by Europe's economic crises which had spawned fascism. This colonial amputation had been imposed on them. Israel's attack on Arab national consciousness was paralleled by the rise of Arab socialism. In 1952 Nasser overthrew the monarchy in Egypt. In Syria the Ba'ath Socialist Party achieved power in 1956. Regimes which were totally dependent on the pro-Israeli West to prop themselves up such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States and the Yemen, were less anti-Zionist. In Egypt, Syria and Iraq the move to anti-Zionism was concomitant with a form of socialism. The Arab masses of the anti-colonial states saw the overthrow of Zionism and of European colonialism as a similar struggle. Left-wing military regimes survived by bartering their neutrality between the Soviet Union and the pro-Israel U.S.A. Thus in. many Arab States desire for land reform, a free market for natural resources and anti-Zionism were all linked.

Trouble for the militarists

The 1960's saw significant changes. Israel began to become less strident in its Zionism. Racial tensions in the country between Western middle-class
36

Jews and illiterate numerically equal non-European Jews softened its monolithic seige-cornmunity mentality. NonEuropean Jews were less imbued with militarist Zionist notions and sought only a stable existence. In 1965 the elections saw a crushing defeat for the Rafi. This Party was associated with the Zionist fathers of Israel, Ben Gurion and Peres. and with the sinister Dayan. It won only 10 seats out of 120. Premier Eshkol won 49 seats (including 4 Arab deputies). Eshkol used this victory to replace the hardline Zionist Golda Meir with Abba Eban who was violently against Ben Gurion's " adventurist " foreign policy of vicious armed raids on Arab States. Thus Israel was developing a normal wealthy burgeoisie and racial problems. Emigration had almost stopped. In 1966 it had become a mere 15,000. Emigration, the prime source of manpower for the militarists and of social disruption leading to extreme Zionism, had ceased to be a significant factor. The Arab States were changing also. They were becoming wealthier. The Arabs had never been militarily capable of conquering Israel. Israel had a well equipped army using U.S. weapons. It had a skilled technology. But the Arab States remained hostile to Zionism. They had a much larger, more articulate educated class than hitherto. This class was created by the revolutions in the fifties and saw the destruction of Israel as essential for the overthrow of imperialism. This meant that Arab states remained strident in their criticism of Israel and in their criticism of the Arab feudal puppet regimes dependent on Western Imperialism. It meant also that well armed articulate socialist guerrilla movements developed in the Arab States. All this was especially true of Syria. This country had a revolutionary Ba'ath regime. It had nationalised all the means of production, opened relations with China, and continuously criticised backsliding, socialist pragmatists such as Nasser. It was from Syria that the AI-Fath group operated. This group made constant attacks on Israel. These were courageously supported by Syria. This gave the militarist group in Israel what they saw as their last chance to stop Israel becoming a normal bourgeois democracy. In January, 1967, Peres said that "the Syrians were the only ones who have not felt any real blow from the Israelis. Perhaps the time has now come to teach them a good lesson." It is in this context that the tragedies of the last three years _ must be seen.

Eshkol was constantly threatened from the right for weakness and finally outflanked by the militarists.

Israel strikes again

This group, using Nasser's seizure of the Straits of Tiran which was a purely symbolic gesture with no economic significance, attacked the Arab States. In this they utilised Western incomprehension of Nasser's bombastic threats to falsify what was essentially merely territorial aggrandisement. Jordan suffered worst from this war. Reactionary and revolutionary Arab States have thus drawn together. All Arab States, even the formerly warring Yemen and Egypt, now stand united. In Israel the militarists stand supreme. Golda Meir and Peres rule. And Moshe Dayan, an open advocate of war, has come close to seizing power and only remains in the cabinet to ensure its constant shift to the Right and his constantly growing control of the armed forces. Arab terrorist groups have mushroomed and operate all over the world. Al-Fath even operates from the territory of the reactionary King Hussein of Jordan. The militarists in Israel cannot relinquish any of their territorial gains because they thrive on war tension. Jerusalem has become a temple to Zionist military victory. President Nixon continues to supply arms to the Israeli forces which remain capable of crushing any Arab army. At the same time the Arabs cannot back down. The million refugees from Zionism have become nearly two million. Clearly until Zionist militarism is checked the Arab social revolution will remain subordinate to the needs of defence. And national unity will triumph over the need for class struggle. Thus Syria and Iraq have to fight. And Egypt, Algeria and Morocco have been forced to face a similar position. The reactionary Arab states now fear a further expansion of Israel with half of Jordan under Israel control. It is difficult to see how this problem can be solved except militarily, so long as the U.S.A. acquiesces in arming Israel and the USSR refuses to supply similar arms to the Arabs. The danger of a coup by Moshe Dayan remains the most ominious portent for the future. He has already received a petition signed by 250,000 calling for him to be Premier. He has the backing of 20 Deputies in the Knesset and the complete allegiance of the armed forces. If he comes to power the Middle East will be plunged into what might be the beginning of a World War.

THE CHURCHES DURING THE CRISIS

IT IS A MARK of the irrelevance of much of the modern Irish Church that whenever a crisis in the North erupts the Churches cease to be of paramount significance. In between crises the leaders of the Churches receive a great deal of publicity for their efforts to patch up wounds created by their ancestors. Such was certainly true when representatives of the four main Churches visited the Bogside and Fountain Street in Derry. Their reception was friendly on all sides and liberal newspapers hailed the visit as one of enormous significance. Only a month later the North was plunged into a frenzy of fascist repression and fear. The main factor to bear in mind in an examination of the Churches' public stance in the North is that their leaders know that they cannot momentously influence events. Furthermore all the Churches are expected to adopt a liberal position on the problem of sectarian hatred. No Church leader could really suggest nowadays that hatred was Christian. The significant policies are therefore seen in what the leaders do not do and
in their attitudes to the subordinate clergy who have more local influence. The main churches in the North are the Catholic and Presbyterian. The latter has two of the most significant classes in its fold: the petty bourgeoisie on the one hand and the Paisleyite working class on the other. While the Presbyterian Church is technically democratic it is in effect controlled by an alliance of the clergy and the petty bourgeois group, which comprises small shopkeepers, small factory owners and the lesser professionals. These are, of course, the backbone of the local Protestant communities and while they do not control the Orange Order, they are certainly considered locally as the citizens of greatest stature. Their theology is polemical rather than protestant. Because they fear that their complex web of privilege and contract is threatened by the Catholics, they tend to align themselves either with the anti-reformist right-wing of the Unionist party or with the more militant Paisleyite movement. Though only a minority join the latter, they do, in effect, constitute the organisational backbone of Paisleyism. The working-class Presbyterians, including those who constitute the militant wing of Paisleyism, are inhabitants of the Shankill Road area. This area is only about thirty per cent Church of Ireland. More significantly the Presbyterian clergy are indigenous to the area while most Church of Ireland ministers are not. As a result even the Church of Ireland laity in the Shankill Road look to the Presbyterians for their ideological leadership. The Presbyterian Church clearly represents the most reactionary elements in the North: a declining middle class throughout the province and a traditionally anti-Catholic unskilled working-class in Belfast. In East Belfast the majority of Protestants who organise joint vigilante committees are Church of Ireland and skilled. The Presbyterian Church is more important in areas that are totally Protestant such as the Shankill. In areas such as Ardoyne, religion plays a less important role among Protestants. There has been a marked trend to-

wards reaction at the Presbyterian Assemblies in the last few years. This year an Evangelical Protestant from Bangor who has little time for the Ecumenical movement, Dr. John Carson, was elected Moderator. The General Assembly was held in the R.D.S. in Dublin this year. Among other things it passed a unanimous vote of confidence in the R.U.C., the Stormont government, and by analogy the Ulster Constitution. The lone dissenting voice of Rev. Terence McCaughey from Dublin, received a lukewarm reception. Needless to say there was much private doubt expressed at the attendance of President De Valera, and the playing of the National Anthem of the Republic. There was a good deal of annoyance also at the treatment the southern press gave their bigoted prevarications and the prominence the press accorded to Terence McCaughey. At the end of the Assembly, Dr. Withers, the outgoing Moderator, made an incredible speech claiming the troubles of the North were caused by individual failure rather than any specific grievance. Last year Dr. Withers had steered a perilous course between his Paisleyites and his few O'Neillites. During the General Election he went on holiday to South Africa. But Dr. Carson in his politics, background, and theology inclines to the reaction which Withers had tried to avoid. In August Dr. Carson attended the funeral of the dead Protestant who was killed during the riots before the troops arrived. There is evidence that this man was shot in the head when attacking Catholics leaving their burning homes. His mere attendance along with Mr. Paisley and his cohorts had an unfortunate significance. This was made more pointed by the non-attendance of catholic churchmen at other funerals. His funeral oration was even more tactless. He warned the people present not to seek revenge. This could have been expected of any cleric, even Mr. Paisley. But he continued to justify turning the other cheek by quoting " vengeance is mine saith the Lord and woe unto them who arrogate my authority! " This passage has a history of unfortunate theological implications and is beloved by clerical demagogues. Furthermore it implied that vengeance was needed, thereby implying guilt on the Catholic side. When the Catholic hierarchy issued a statement on the events in the Falls Road, Dr. Carson outflanked the Prime Minister by stating then "this exacerbates tension which prevails about the province." His statement, furthermore, seemed to make claims about, the
36

political role the Catholic hierarchy. The statement, he claimed, " confirms the fears and suspicions of the Protestant people." The statement of five Presbysterian ministers in the Shankill was much more moderate. It merely claimed that the hierarchy had made things more difficult. The emergency meeting of the Presbyterian General Assembly confirmed that Dr. Carson was speaking from a firm base of reactionary Presbyterian support. On August 26th reverting to traditional evangelical explanations for all the world's evils he said the Northern troubles sprang from "shameful misunderstandings, evil rumours, and drunkenness." This evidently contributed little to an understanding in the North. The statement totally ignored political problems or their solution. The attitude of the rank and file of Presbyterian clergy was not made apparent till well into the present disturbances. Rev. J. Hill took a very brave stand in debunking Mr. Paisley when he denied that an armed guard for children attending a school near the Falls Road was necessary. But the Presbyterian clergy who were in a position to restrain the mobs in the Shankill and Sandy Row were conspicuous by their absence until early September when a line of clergy twice stopped a clash between the people of Shankill and the British troops. Since the majority of the clergy come from the most reactionary petty bourgeois background, they tend to support with some misgivings the policies of the Paisleyites although they resent him stealing their flocks and incorporating them in his Free Presbyterian Church. The professors of the Presbyterian Seminary Assemblies College, find that students entering it in the last five years have tended increasingly towards a right wing position. The Church of Ireland plays a different role. Its laity generally come from the landowning class, who control the Unionist Party and from the East of the Bann middle-classes. This latter group constituted the main support for O'Neillism, while the landowners support their own, namely O'Neill and Chichester Clark. Most of the clergy are trained in the South and come from pretty comfortable backgrounds. Although the Church of Ireland is more numerous in the North there are a greater number of artificially subsidised parishes and consequently a greater number of clergymen south of the border. Thus the Church of Ireland has supported O'Neill and his cohorts since the

;f

beginning of the crisis. As a Church it has always supported the ruling government North and South. Because of its clerical membership it has little influence with the Protestant forces of raction. All the year the Church leaders have called for peace. Their success has not been evident. Canon Kerr at the Apprentice Boys' march in Derry on August 12th, made a moderate speech calling for " a competition in doing good based on the bible story of the two debtors." During the riots in Derry two Derry clergymen called for peace saying that "perfect love casteth out fear." On August 22nd the Church of Ireland Gazette criticised the pacifism of the Church of Ireland. On the same day the Dean of Cork, F. K. Johnston, said he was ashamed to be termed a Protestant because of the massacre in Belfast. During August the new Primate, Dr. Simms, made various calls for peace. On one occasion he admitted "many people were unaware of the wrongs existing in the community." In general, the performance of Dr. Simms was cautious and although he was more strenuous than his predecessor in his call for peace, he had little effect. The Catholic Church probably acted in the most courageous and responsible manner. This is not because of any greater political depth. Cardinal Conway still finds Eddie McAteer the most congenial politician in the North. All the hierarchy of the North apart from Rev. Anthony MacFeely (elected in 1965) whose residence is in Letterkenny, were appointed during a period when the Catholic hierarchy really did control the Nationalist Party to a large degree. Dr. Neil Farren was appointed to Derry in 1939. Dr. William Philbin, appointed to Belfast in 1953. Dr. Eugene O'Doherty to Newry in 1944, Dr. Austin Quinn to Cavan in 1950, William Cardinal Conway to Armagh in 1958, and Dr. Eugene O'Callaghan to Monaghan in 1943. Thus they are an old hierarchy with extensive contacts with the old A.O.H. and Nationalist alliance which ruled the Catholic areas outside Belfast. During the year the hierarchy confined itself to issuing statements questioning the truth of official versions of controversial events, appeals for peace and reiterated old charges of underprivilege. Eugene O'Callaghan was probably most consistent and emphatic in his demands for civil rights. This was surprising since only a small part of his Diocese is in Tyrone, the bulk of it being in the Republic. Dr. Farren was the most insistent in his efforts efforts for peace, facilitated, of course, by an amenable Protestant

community in Derry. But he did authorise night-long vigils for peace in St. Columb's and St. Eugene's Cathedrals on November 16th and he led and organised the joint tour of Derry by Church leaders in July. The hierarchy did not publicly support the C.R.A. for a number of reasons. Firstly the hierarchy had a few contacts with the new C.R.A. leaders and had an ill-concealed distaste for People's Democracy. Secondly they seem to have decided at their bi-annual Synod in Maynooth last October to refrain from giving ammunition to people who would stir up Protestant fears of an episcopal overlordship of the C.R.A. The hierarchy's relations with the Unionist party have remained pretty frigid over the year since the big disputes over a higher state subsidy and new governing boards for Catholic schools and the Mater Hospital in Belfast. Earlier in the decade, with increasing state expenditure on Catholic social services, they had become fairly warm but these big disputes had already considerably worsened relations before the advent of the C.R.A. It does seem, however, that Cardinal Conway's statement during the February elections was a concession to O'Neillite Unionists. By stating that Catholics could vote according to their consciences he merely repeated a tenet of the Vatican Council. But Unionist circles at the time were delighted and rightly believed that many middle-class Catholics would interpret the statement as permission to vote Unionist. During the tragic events of August the hierarchy reacted with restraint and honesty. Dr. Philbin visited the besieged Falls Road area when it was still quite dangerous and he was instrumental in having troops drafted into Ardoyne, which lay at the mercy of the Specials. The statement of the whole Northern hierarchy which clearly laid the blame at the feet of organised Protestant extremism in Belfast, and attacked the defence of these forces by the Unionist mass media may have been provocative. But nobody could deny that it must have had a beneficial effect on world opinion and must have been a necessary booster to Catholic morale in Belfast which was besieged on the one hand by Protestant mobs and on the other by the Unionist press. Very wisely too the hierarchy from the South confined themselves to calling for interdenominational relief. The prime Catholic episcopal virtue is probably that of pastoral care, however misguided, for its people. Whenever sectarian riots have hit the North the hierarchy have reacted admirably.

Indeed during the massacres of 1935 the Catholic hierarchy were the only significant organised body to attempt to bring Unionist oppression to the attention of the world. Similarly in 1922 when the Irish government was relatively silent on sectarian dispossession of Catholics in the North the Catholic hierarchy was loud in protest. However, the rank conservatism of the hierarchy comes to the fore during spells of peace. By the beginning of September, Dr. Philbin was" Welcoming the proposals of Mr. Callaghan"

down by the fickle Mr. Callaghan on September 16th. On the same day the people of Falls Road and Divis Street voted to keep their barricades. Then on the next day Dr. Philbin with a phalanx of the more conservative local clergy pressurised the people to take them down when their menfolk were at work. The record of the Catholic hierarchy bears comparison with any other powerful interest group in the North. Its record has been one primarily of politically shrewd, honest conservatism. The only other significant Church in

and Cardinal Conway "was hopeful for the future." They issued these statements when Catholic families were daily being evicted from mixed streets in Belfast and in the same week in which the British troops refused to stop intimidation at work. Throughout the year the hierarchy have placed far too much trust in grudging reform proposals doled out by the Unionists. They have shown themselves to be interested more in peace than in justice. The hierarchy supported the month's truce called after O'Neill's famous television speech last December. The hierarchy also demanded a period of grace for the ambiguous Chichester-Clark when he came to power. Dr. Philbin's evident collusion with the British military in removing the barricades is probably the worst example of a hierarchical desire for peace at all costs. General Freeland had been told to get the barricades

the North is the Methodist Church. This Church represents neither the working class nor the wealthy middleclass. It has a minority influence in most areas in the North. On the Shankill Road there are two Methodist churches. But nowhere does it have a great deal' of influence. Its Annual Assembly in 1968 in Cork showed a marked degree of reaction. And as a Church it was hardly in a position to greatly effect the Protestant community in the North. During the August crisis its governing body made no public statement. It did finally make a statement asking for peace when a Methodist church was burnt down on the Crurnlin Road. A statement by its leading clergymen is not recorded. The Protestant Churches are in a weak position in the North. They have allowed their laity to remain theologically naive and Evangelical and Paisleyite in their attitudes. Biblical niceties to next 'page-col. 3
39

BOOK REVIEW
MORALS, LAW and AUTHORITY, sources an attitudes in the Church. Edited J. P. Mackey, Gill and Macmillan, Dublin. 1969. Pp, xiv + 154. Price 18/-. THIS VOLUME -IS not a book. It is rather a collection of articles by seven Irish theological and philosophical academics. There is a considerable difference between the two forms of publishing. No one in his right mind would attempt, in the course of a single sustained argument such as a book proper requires, to cover anything like the ground this collection covers in the course of a mere 150 pages. Dealing with topics as remote from one another as " Pagan Philosophy and Christian Ethics" and "The Church's Message" the collection undoubtedly achieves the aim of breadth ; whether it also hits its self-proclaimed target of analysis in depth is an altogether different matter. Presumably Father Mackey collected these articles in order to make a contribution to the renewal of that most degenerate of all theological studies, moral theology. No part of Catholic theology ever suffered the ravages of an inept scholasticism to quite the extent that moral theology has in the past few centuries. And nothing has shown this more clearly than the pretty generally immature and unsophisticated level of sophistry which characterised argument on both sides of the contraception debate. The aim of renewal here is, then, undoubtedly worthy and if only for the reason that any dispassionate contribution is likely to bring some advance, this book must be welcomed. But does it succeed in anything as a whole, as a book in its own right? It is difficult to give any general assessment of so variegated an assortment of articles, other than that, like the curate's egg, it is good in parts. It is also, I feel, very bad in parts. But, being a collection, we have no need to lose the baby with the bath water, and some contributions, notably those of Watson, Mackey and McDonagh make it worth having. Father Watson, writing on "Pagan Philosophy and Christian Ethics" is an author with that rare ability to summarise a great deal of accurate scholarship in a simple manner which is nonetheless satisfying to the scholars. He is thus able to argue both vigorously and in detail a complex thesis about the ways in which Catholic moral theology was in its origins deeply influenced by pagan philosophy.
<40

Father Mackey points out, from a different point of view, an important corollary. We are far too glib, he maintains, in hyphenating the "faith and morals" bit of the infallibility and "authoritative teaching" formulae. The authority with which the Church teaches in moral matters is considerably more relative than that of its teaching in matters of faith, for the simple reason, as Father Watson has shown, that human reason and experience enter more fully into the understanding of Christian morality than it does into dogmatic formulae of the more speculative kind.. Thus the combined force of these two arguments requires us to acknowledge that some of the so-called norms which we might otherwise have thought specifically Christian, are not so at all but are e.g, rather Stoic or neo-Platonist in origin. And then they begin to look, after all, as not so essential to Christ's message and example as we thought. This is good " renewal" research: it requires us to go back and examine the sources of religious beliefs with a new, less conditioned eye. Which is, is it not, what renewal is about ? So much for abstract absolutism at the level of the Church's formulation of moral teaching. Father McDonagh, however, draws another corollary which follows from the same point with even more direct bearing on everyday Christian living. If the Church's teaching on morals must lean heavily on secular experience, then so must the conscience of the everyday Christian in his interpretation of that teaching. One cannot then argue (in the customary, though quite circular fashion) that an "informed conscience" is one which simply and exclusively informs itself from authoritative teaching. This is perhaps the only really fruitful and positive. point to have emerged from the contraception debate, for it places heavy emphasis on authentic maturity of Christian life as the chief source of moral teaching, rather than on abstract legal or philosophical formulae. At this point we might have expected a philosopher to help things on with an attempt to give some positive account of the philosophical reconstructions of human moral experience. But P. J. McGrath's contribution on " Natural Law and Moral Argument" is both purely negative and, in my view, frankly inferior. He has a popular, if shifting target in traditional natural law theory. But it is not, in the first place, altogether clear just whose natural law theory he

is attacking. Sometimes it is Aquinas' and then only interpreted in the worst scholastic manual tradition; sometimes it is the manuals themselves, and sometimes again arguments in Humani Generis. But all of these are arguments in quite different traditions and spirits and McGrath just lumps them together without discrimination. Add to that the fact that he never gives them a fair run anyway; that he blandly accuses them all of committing a notoriously controversial fallacy known as the "naturalistic fallacy"-to which his own unargued, merely stated, alternative theory, is at least as plausibly open-and I think you have a pretty sub-standard contribution. I judge this contribution thus harshly, both because I think it deserves it and because it is a matter of some importance. For it is a fact that theology, while increasingly recognising the debt it owes to literary, political and artistic attempts to reconstruct human experience is simultaneously finding the philosophical reconstructions too narrow, academic and arid to be of much help. And yet, if there is to be any kind of systematic renewal of moral theology, rather than simply "renewed insights" of that piecemeal and partial character which are nowadays so in vogue, a renewal of moral philosophy is very much a need. P. J. McGrath's contribution is not, I think, a contribution in that sense, whereas most of the others are. It is a pity to have them so badly let down by a contribution which their own theses required to be good. DENYS TURNER

THE CHURCHES DURING THE CRISIS

continued cannot effect generations of clerical difference to lay religion. Thus all laity are potential victims of Paisley's religious views even if they are not attracted to his fascist politics. Futhermore with a well organised U.V.F. only a very brave clergyman could operate independently in riot areas. Similarly the younger Catholic clergy do not play a leading role in the C.R.A. In rural towns such as Dungiven the influence of the priest is more marked. But the era of clerical hegemony in Catholic political circles ended with the advent of the C.R.A.

Fred Cogley writes on

THIS

SEASON'S

RUGBY

PROSPECTS'
should be incentive enough for Kiernan to make a determined bid to hold his place; for it would be a suitable climax to a career, which has already seen him captain the British and Irish Lions. Just to ice the cake for Kiernan, he would appreciate the honour even more if he were to get his 47th cap in a Triple Crown:victory over Wales at Lansdowne Road !' However, if Kiernan does get his five more caps they win be earned on merit because he will have to prove, first of all, that he is a more accomplished full-backthan Barry O'Driscoll, one of the foremost challengersfor the position. In addition the young Dublin University player, McKibben, has a great deal of promise and a good season in the interprovincials could bring him into the reckoning. There were some doubts expressed about the ability of the Irish threequarter line, following the dismal per"formanceoat,Ca~iffibut-I-feel that with Gibson and Bresnihan in- the- centre the foundations are there for a good line. Harry Rea and John Moroney could also be useful utility men and there are a number of very promising wingers who might be among those considered - Alan Duggan, Jim Tydings, Tom Grace (U.C.D), and Terry Young (St. Mary's), to name I but four. The manner in which Barry McGann took over the out-half role last season indicates that he will remain for some time but with Gibson able to switch from the centre there is no real cause '

IN TERMS OF achievement, Ireland's recent Rugby history has been none too happy insofar as victory in the Triple Crown series has eluded the Irish since the balmy days of 1948 and 1949. However, in terms of performances, the Irish have done considerably better in recent years than ever before: six consecutive internationals were won and no other Irish side had managed to build such an impressively consistent record. Nonetheless, the distinction between " achievement" and "performance" should be noted. I have no doubt that players and supporters would gladly exchange the six-in-a-row sequence for the important three-in-a-row which would have brought the Triple Crown back to Ireland. But each new season brings new hope and the 1969-70 season, which has just opened, could prove to be the most successfulIreland has enjoyed for over 20 years in terms. of achievement and performance. Undoubtedly, there' is enough talent available in the country to build a winning team and there are hopeful signs that among the younger players a deep pool of reserve talent is filling up. The Irish will never be in the position of having too wide a choice but when a crop of good players emerges the lack of strength-in-depth works to Ireland's advantage. The players are kept together and a valuable unity of purpose of spirit can evolve. In other countries, where the choice is much wider, it is considerablymore difficult to keep much the same team intact. The temptation to chop and change, seeking continual improvement, tends to upset team balance but with so much worthwhile talent at their disposal the selectors in the other countries cannot but help experimenting. It may be true that they will seldom come up with a bad team but, while the Irish can have their lean years they can also produce brilliant combinations. It may be presumptuous at such an early stage of a new season to attempt to forecast Ireland's fortunes, particularly when no one is aware of what the opposition may produce, but I expect that Ireland will do extremely well and I feel that the Triple Crown

and the International Championship can be won by the Irish. Apart from the general state of Irish Rugby, which is healthy, one has only to scan through the key positions to see that there is a sufficient number of established players available to ensure that the pattern of the last few seasons is maintained. The team-spirit which has been generated in those years and the wealth of reserve talent which has developed should make for improvement. And it is

possible that in the Interprovincial Championship, which will dominate the pre-Christmas activity, some new candidates for places on the National team will emerge. Kiernan to pass Kyle? At present, we can only deal with players we know who are likely to figure in Ireland's team but still the signs are encouraging. At full-back, Tommy Kiernan is the man in possession and if he plays in the five matches against South Africa, France, England, Scotland and Wales he will become Ireland's most-capped player, passing the record number of caps of 46 held by the great Jack Kyle. This

FRED COGLEY worked with the Irish Times and Evening Herald before becoming the Irish Sports Correspondent of the Sunday Telegraph. He has been R.T.E.'s television commentator on Rugby since 1962 and travelled with the Irish team on their historic tour of Australia in 1967. Later this year will see the publication of Fred Cogley's Irish Rugby Yearbook 1968-69, a comprehensive book designed to fill the gap in Irish Rugby literature.

interesting to see whether Syd Millar and Phil O'Callaghan can hold out Ray McLoughlin, the former Irish captain, who is likely to make a bid to regain his place. Ollie Waldron is another who could get back into favour and the impressive captain of last season's Leinster Cup winners, Sean Lynch (St. Mary's) might also come into the reckoning. In the second row Bill McBride and Mick Molloy look certain to remain but it is rather disconcerting that there are so few players pressing these two for their places. Indeed, if either of the two men in possession lose form, Ireland will have difficulty in finding a suitable replacement.

Strength in the line-out

However, Bill McBride, who has had to plough such a lone furrow in the line-out for Ireland may have some

forward and this would add even more strength to Ireland's line-out play and there are a host of good wingforwards from which the selectors can choose. It is possible that the mighty Noel Murphy will be prevailed upon to rescind his decision to retire from international football and he could join men like Jim Davidson, Tommy Doyle, Mick Doyle, Denis Hickie, Terry Moore and others in a tussle for a place in the back row. Whatever way the selectors move, however, it will be difficult for them not to settle for a very formidable set of forwards and with a pack of such potential, the backs should get plenty of possession to achieve those championship and Triple Crown victories which have eluded Ireland for so long.

Towards the Crown

The famous and powerful South African touring team, who play Ulster in Ravenhill on November 29, will return to Ireland in the New Year and having played Munster in Limerick on January 3, they will open Ireland's International campaign at Lansdowne Road on January 10. Ireland will then travel to Paris to meet France on January 24 and on February 14 Ireland will play England at Twickenham. Scotland will visit Lansdowne Road for their match with Ireland on February 28 and the climax of the season will be reached on March 14 when the Irish take on Wales at Lansdowne Road. On the off-chance that this will be a Triple Crown game, might I suggest that now is the time to book your ticket !

for concern here and the position with regard to the serum-half berth is equally encouraging. Roger Young could be very seriously challenged by Brendan Sherry, now back to peak fitness, and Munster's Liam Hall may also come into contention; while Colin Grimshaw, John Moloney and Vinnie Becker will be other candidates of real potential.

Man in the serum

But the best backs in the world can be of little value if they do not get the ball and therefore it is essential for a team with lofty ambitions to have a good set of forwards. Happily, Ireland appear to be reasonably served up front although, in some cases, there is reason to worry about the shortage of reserves of class. For example, Ken Kennedy is expected to remain as hooker but apart from Paddy Madigan there does not seem to be many promising hookers in a position to take over. However, we must assume and hope that Kennedy will be available throughout the campaign and if so Ireland can be assured of regular possession from the set serums. There are plenty of fine prop forwards in the picture but it will be
.012

of the burden lifted from his shoulders. The arrival of Ken Goodall did much to ease McBride's responsibility, for the tall Goodall proved himself to be just as effective in winning posession at the tail of the line-out as he was in general play. He must surely become one of the greatest No. 8 forwards the game has known and I believe that Ireland can build a truly great back row around him this season. Mick Hipwell could well move to wing-

RACING:

A NEW TRAINER
" Don't call me Dick ... "

ON THE

CURRAGH

" I've always wanted to be a trainer. I've been dissuaded for long enough. But now I'm going ahead. If you want to be successful it's a very hard life. There is a lot of hard work; much more so than people realise. There's no security. You have to live from day to day and year to year " -Richard McCormick.

On his death in 1963, his sixteenyear-old son Richard became the world's youngest racehorse trainer, left in charge of a 22-horse stable that included two horses owned by the (then) Minister for Justice, Mr. Charles J. Haughey. Within twelve days of taking out his licence, the young trainer had saddled two winners. A few months (and several winners) later he gave up training to study for a veterinary degree at U.C.D. Last year, complete with degree, he left for a year's practical experience in the U.S.A. He returned in June, immediately applied for a licence, and set about preparing his Curragh stables for the 1970 flat racing season. Born in Meath and educated at Newbridge College and U.C.D., Richard McCormick (" Don't call me Dick: I can't stand it ") is, at 23, an articulate and committed young man with definite aims and ideas. His university veterinary degree and his American stay have afforded him valuable know-how and experience in many aspects of racing. Both should stand to him in the future.

big U.S. stakes winners-Czar Alexander and Ludham-to America from Kildare's Milerstown Stud.) He also worked with the Tartan Farm Corporation, a breeding farm in Ocala, Florida. The experience gained he regards as invaluable, but it was not easy: "I was working twenty hours a day, losing a lot of weight and getting little money ... " How did he find the racing industry in the U.S.A.? "It's very businesslike. People in America race horses for one of two reasons: either to win money or to lose it by writing it off. Consequently there is a tremendous pressure on trainers to run horses. That's why their horses run so frequently. There, they can live out of horses-perhaps just out of two or three. They are often accused of running them too often and breaking them down."

Betting five million

" Racing executives in the States do everything to make the average punter important. They even insist on a fixed number of work-outs for horses so that up-to-date information is brought to the notice of the punters via the form sheets. Betting, of course, is very big over there. On a Saturday at Aqueduct, 50,000 people will bet five million dollars (40 a head)." "Americans are now favouring grass

Racing across the Atlantic

In America he worked at the New York race tracks of Belmont and Aqueduct, and at Hialeah in Florida with Dr. William O. Reed, one of America's top veterinary surgeons. (Reed recently imported Pampered King, sire of two THE SPORT OF KINGS is a McCormick family tradition. The late R. J. (" Dick ") McCormick was a wellknown and long-established Irish trainer, whose own father, Mark, was regarded in his day as being one of the most brilliant huntsmen in the country. Dick McCormick learned his training art during a twenty-year spell with the legendary "Atty " Persse at Stockbridge and, later, with Steve Donoghue at Epsom. The latter--one of racing's all-time greats-rode the winners of six English and four Irish Derbys. McCormick was one of the few men ever allowed to ride The Tetrarch at workouts-a signal achievement, for that horse was apparently the nearest thing to a bullet ever seen on a racecourse and one which Donoghue called" the fastest I ever rode." As a trainer, operating from Summerhill House on the Curragh, McCormick had a highly successful career, winning most of the major flat races in Ireland (including a couple of Phoenix "1500"s) and a number of Classics. He was a specialist with fillies and proved expert at preparing them for the racecourse.

tracks. I would like to see dirt tracks introduced here in a small way. We've been racing here for three hundred years. There, it is comparatively new. Consequently, there aren't so many diehards around and they will accept new ideas. In a few years time if I have a horse good enough, I'd like to take him out to the U.S.A. for six weeks or so and race him a couple of times in some of their big stakes races as our Irish horses are more than comparable to their grass horses. The tendency used to be to go to England. Now it is France. I think, soon it will be the U.S.A." McCormick believes that the average Irish racegoer experiences a lot of discomfort because facilities at some race meetings are not all that they should be. He is in favour of centralised racing: concentrating racing at a few of the bigger and better courses with a programme arranged to suit particular types of horses. He believes that more could be done to increase public interest in racing and to entice racegoers but that, under the circumstances, the Racing Board "are doing a fantastic job."

amount to advertise Irish bloodstock in the last ten years. He would like to see positive steps taken to assist the development of Irish jockeys (such as Australia's apprentice schools) for, as he accurately points out, most of our top native jockeys have, in fact, had foreign experience. (In his opinion, the best jockey currently riding in these islands is Ron Hutchinson.)

A filly for Mr. Haughey

Over the winter, McCormick will be training about a dozen horses at his Summerhill House stables in preparation for next year. Following on his return to Ireland he had discussions with his owners who include Mr.

guineas advanced by English trainer Staff Ingham for a Tesco Boy colt out of The Veil (the dam of Novitiate). McCormick cherishes no illusions about the amount of hard work and the number of problems that will face him in the course of his chosen profession. He is up and about each morning at an hour when most citizens' alarm clocks have still plenty in hand. The challenge, however, appeals to this quiet, determined young man and he can shrug off the thought of the sport's inherent insecurity: "I've got a degree behind me now as well as a farm and land," On the subject of marriage he pauses, grins, and professes that his immediate concern is for four-legged fillies ; he avows

A boost from the Tote

The issue on which he feels most strongly is that of tote monopoly. He sees its absence as the root problem in the Irish racing industry. "A tote monopoly would definitely benefit Irish racing by increasing the stake money and giving an all-round boost to owners, trainers, stable lads, etc. In the States owners don't even have to pay an entry fee for certain races-the stake money comes from the gate and the tote," "A tote monopoly would also straighten the game out by making betting coups more difficult to bring off and by discouraging "springers", thereby enhancing the chances of the average punter. If money is being ploughed back into racing because of a tote monopoly then certain trainers would be discouraged from compulsive gambling. A tote monopoly doesn't discourage betting but it does mean that trainers don't have to bet to live because the stake money would be higher. The big punters can still bet against the pool." McCormick feels that Irish racing has made enormous progress in recent years. "The sport has been cleaned up considerably by patrol cameras, efficient stewards and dope testing. This is a very good thing, for the racing public are after a square deal and they deserve one," He considers that Irish trainers-particularly Vincent O'Brien, Paddy Prendergast and the McGrath family have done a tremendous
44

Haughey, bloodstock expert Bertie Kerr, and English owner Mr. C. A. B. St. George (whose Lorenzaccio has achieved success in England). He attended Goff's autumn sales at Ballsbridge last month and made two purchases: for Mr. Haughey (whose racing colours are black and blue) he secured a yearling filly by Sea Hawke II out of Novitiate for 2,200 guineas; he also paid 1,750 guineas for a Tesco Boy yearling colt out of The Chaser. (The colt is a half-brother to Sinn Fein; its dam was trained-with great successby the late "Dick" McCormick for Mr. Haughey.) His buying certainly appears astute, for one of the highest prices paid at Goff's was the 13,500

he has" enough problems now without marrying them! "

Expert Opinion
If Vincent O'Brien is half as good a judge of a young trainer as he is of a thoroughbred then Richard McCormick is assured of a bright future. Talking to NUSIGHT last week, the worldfamous Baldoyle maestro said: "I have no doubt that Richard gained valuable experience from his father whom I knew very well and admired greatly as a capable and most efficient trainer. He is sure to do well. And his experience in the United States is bound to prove of great value to him in his training career,"

J. :8. :KE A N E
talks to the Monday Circle
Edited by DORINE ROHAN
JOHN B. KEANE was born in Listowel, Co. Kerry, in 1928 and educated at St. Michael's College. At twenty-one he was the editor of his own newspaper, which lasted for one issue. During his varied career he has been chemist's assistant in England, a furnace operator, assistant fowl buyer, street sweeper, labourer and barman. When he had saved a few hundred pounds, John B. Keane came home to his native Listowel and bought a public-house. His writing up to that time had consisted of short stories, poems and a few articles. "He turned to the theatre and here his natural sense of characterisation, coupled with his gifts as a storyteller, created the atmosphere for so many years lost to Irish letters." He wrote Sive in ten days. It swept the country, and since then Keane's talents as a playwright have entertained, informed and been appreciated in many corners of the globe. One does not have to be in the presence of John B. Keane for long to realise that here is a shrewd, perceptive man. He is strikingly honest-sometimes literally so! As he says himself, " I admire a man who will stand up and fight for what he believes in. If you stand up and fight they can't beat you. You might be knocked down but you can always come again!" John B. Keane believes in a lot of things. He believes in John B. Keane, not through any arrogance or false pride, but with a self-respect and faith in his own judgment which is likeable and admir45

able. He believes in Ireland and the Irish people with a love-hate curiosity and affection which goad him unceasingly to question and comment with humour and candour, sometimes" too near the bone" for those who do not have his honesty. He is a controversial figure; his plays have received rave notices and condemnation but they never fail to fill the seats of Irish theatres. But John has learnt to discriminate where his critics are concerned, and knows what to take as constructive, and what to eschew as narrowmindedness, and" sour grapes" carping. In his autobiography he says, "Nobody ever accepts a writer. He accepts himself. To be a writer, a recognised writer, you have to dream about it from the age of reason onwards.

You have to hold this thing into yourself and you have to listen to taunts and jibes far removed from clinical and detached criticism. You have to be conscious of jealousies and the criticism that arises from them but you have to have the consciousness to realise that you are not without jealousy yourself. You have to listen to, and read, things about yourself far removed from the truth and you must say nothing whatsoever about it. You'll be called anything from communist to anti-clerical and if you dare to deny it you'll succeed only in hanging yourself." A visitor to this country recently remarked, " One thing the Irish love is a failure. They are suspicious of success and in many cases resent it, especially in their fellow countrymen. It's a

question of 'If at first you don't succeed you'll probably have more friends' ." John B. Keane is a success and he has many friends. If you meet him and he likes you, he will show it, just as you won't be left in doubt if he dislikes you! Among his best-known plays are Sive,

Sharon's Grave, The Year of the Hiker, Many Young Men of Twenty, The Man from Clare, and more recently The Rain at the End of Summer and his recordbreaking Big Maggie. His Letters of a Successful T.D.-a hilarious correspondence between a T.D. and his family-is a best seller. Here in this extract from the Monday Circle discussion with him, John B. Keane talks about himself and his views on many subjects.

J. B. KEANE onLetters of a Successful T.O.

Yes, but Tull McAdoo does not emerge as a bad character. He is no better or worse an Irishman than anyone here to night for example! He is a negative T.D. and epitomises most of the Irish T.D.s of today. There is a lot of rubbish talked about patriotism today . ., I think patriotism is the greatest killer of idealism that was ever born. "Letters" is a satire about the jobbery that goes on in Irish politics. I think every country should have a Minister of Culture and the Arts to protect the rights of the writer and artist who wish to express their views and the views of others." at you, intelligent friendly trees. They made me happy. I think I am going deeper into my own people and deeper into myself. There is always something new to discover, something new to comment on. I suppose you could say I am maturing. When you are a young man you say daring things with only a certain element of truth. When you are older you make the comments with more thought and experience. In playwriting you have to think and consider more deeply than ever. on his car who is a potential killer and he is fined 10/- if he is caught.

Why do you write?

I love people and I have to write. I cannot bear to see unhappiness in others. It makes me unhappy. I have to become involved. I believe in people. I love them and hate them because I know what they are. At times I hate this country for its hypocrisy and its dreams of the Irish language and the G.A.A. and we will rake up a thousand years of muck to produce one ideology which is not worth a damn. And everybody here knows this and you don't give a damn either! I believe that all responsible people should be actively involved in politics. I am a member of the Fine Gael party and regularly appear on public platforms on behalf of Fine Gael candidates. I would have gone forward as a Dail candidate in the last General Election had it not been for the fact that an old friend was going forward. Someone asked just now whom I admire in Ireland today. I admire Pat Taaffe, and Noel Murphy. I admire the Taoiseach, although I am not a member of his party. I admire Gay Byrne because everybody gets an even break on that programme of his.

Success
I don't think I have written a good play yet. The Year of the Hiker is probably the best, because it has the most charity, but that's not a great dramatic reason to give for a play. I don't consider myself as a success. The Irish critics regard me as a fellow who can write a play but who has not written one yet. I am coming to terms with myself and trying to tie in my own crooked obsessions and dreams with my life, my family and my development. I may never do what I want to do. That is the great tragedy, but I keep hammering away all the time. I am not a bitter man as people who know me and love me will tell you. Ninety-nine per cent of what I have written is comedy. Will you not allow me one per cent of kick? I hate injustice. I get angry at injustice. Such as a fellow running down a fellow who isn't there to defend himself. Or a bunch of thugs in a dance hall attacking a couple or a fellow on his own. And then if they are caught they are fined 1 in court, by some cowardly judge. It's a disgrace. Or a fellow with a bald tyre

Catholicism
The Catholic Church in Ireland is adjusting itself. It has (because of the detachment of its senior priests and prelates) lost much of its power. That it should lose control of people is good because the Church should not control. It should guide, assist, instruct, etc. Its efforts to control have placed it in a precarious position. And whatever about the clergy, the people will rescue the Church.

Change of Environment
No, I don't need any change. I was offered a post in the University of California where I would write the title of a play on the blackboard and sit down with the students and work from there. But I turned down the offer. I don't want to leave Ireland. I love the place. Just this evening driving into Cork I was marvelling at the trees along the way. Irish trees which you will find nowhere else-tall stately trees, nodding
46

On being a Publican he says:

I wouldn't advise anyone to become a publican, and I really mean this. Your home isn't your own. It is a public place where any kind of scoundrel can enter and spend his time. A man can bore you to death if he wants to and you have to hear his confession too, if he feels like telling it. You have to

listen to "best friends" cutting each other to pieces when one or the other is absent. You have to listen to every sort of gossip or go out of business. You have to listen to every dirty story that goes the rounds. This is okay the first time you hear it, but when you hear it for the hundredth time and you have to laugh as much as the first time it's a bit irritating, but if you don't you'll find yourself losing a customer. In the summer you get every type calling. There was one occasion when two English reporters called in for a drink to break their journey. They spent an hour over one drink, but they missed nothing that went on around them. After a while a tinker woman, who was well and truly scattered, came in with a baby in her arms and she was looking for a drink. I refused her and she got annoyed. The two lads said nothing but they were so interested I was wondering what they were up to. The tinker woman left having conclusively proved my illegitimacy and after a while the two press lads left. Later that night the 'phone rang and it was a certain newspaper who asked, "Tell me, is it true that you, who wrote Sive, refuse to serve tinkers in your bar any more?" "Nonsense!" I replied, " I served two of your reporters here this morning! "

mushrooms. Maybe some of them are crude and clumsy but it must be remembered that you cannot build a new native drama in a generation. The rising generation should bring the harvest of plays which the theatre needs to give it life and vitality and exuberance, to give it hilarity and lunacy and bustle because these are the things that a rising generation has in abundance.

Anonymous letter writers

I get about thirty of these a year. I have often asked myself what prompts people to write anonymous letterswhy people should deliberately set out to hurt people who have done them no harm. A while ago I got a letter from one who calls herself" Good Catholic I love to hear the music of the rain ; I love to hear the sound Of yellow waters flushing in the main; I love the breaks between When little boys begin To sail their paper galleons in the drain. Grey clouds sail west and silver tips remain ; The street, thank God, is bright and clean again. A golden, mellow peace for ever clings Along the little street ; There are so very many lasting things Beyond the wall, of strife In our beleaguered life ; There are so many lovely songs to sing Of God and His eternal love that rings Of simple people and of simple things.

Rural Theatre
Michael MacLiammoir said that the theatre is an evil place for those who do not belong. Any place is an evil place for those who do not belong. I do not belong to the theatre, at least to the metropolitan theatre which claims tradition with portfolio. Anybody can belong to the rural theatre. It is not an evil place and nobody should try to tell us that the rural theatre is not truly international. Shakespeare was a country boy and so was Yeats. So was T. C. Murray and so was Lorca, But we must keep the rural theatre free from too much metropolitan influence and let it develop its own character. In many aspects it's still a sprawling adolescent but not for long because the theatre is experiencing the pangs of rebirth in rural Ireland. It is taking a strange shape but the stranger the better, and the more independent of outside influence the better. Gone are the days when a bit of fishing gut had to be tied to the legs of an actor to remind him that it was his turn to say something, or to stop him from saying too much! Gone are the days too, when forgotten plays had to be unearthed for last-minute productions. New plays by country boys are springing up like

Communism?
A menace with no room for love, charity or free thought or speech. Mother." How does she know she's a good Catholic mother? Someone else will decide that for her at an unexpected date. Anyway good Catholic mothers, or good any kind of mothers do not write anonymous letters. Of course the alleged " Catholic mother" may be nothing more than a small jealous little man! They used to upset us but now when I open a letter I look for a signature. If there is no signature it goes straight into the fire.

Irish Women?
I love them!

The Moon Landing?

A good thing since there is no life there for men to corrupt.

Marriage?
Name a better way to raise a family.

Civilisation?
There is no such place.

Favourite Poem
You have asked me to recite one of my poems. Here is "Church Street" -the street where I was born in Listowel. I love the flags that pave the walk, I love the mud between The funny figures drawn in chalk; I love to hear the sound Of drays upon their round, Of horses and their clocklike walk ; I love to watch the corner people gawk And hear what underlies their idle talk.

Christmas?
I'm all for it.

Death?
I never discuss subjects which are too common.

Bernadette Devlin?
A likeable sparrow. hurts her. I hope nobody

John B. Keane?
I like him-not him. always, but I like

FOUR

LIVES FOUR POLITICAL POEMS

by THOMAS TESSIER

1.

PEACE,

BROTHER!

3.

LETTER

FROM A DRAFTRESISTER

4. ANIMAL DROPPINGS FROM THE MEKONG DELTA His old lady was a problem at first, But they Shot her with sedatives Like a wild elephant, For nearly 48 hours. Later, they bought her off With the usual 89.00 worth of Medals and laudatory double-talk. No other military operation Is carried out with such precision. He was like a plague, noisy, Depressingly naive and gullible. At some point, a virgin still, He wandered into choice And so chose to enlist. Within eighteen months he was Ripped apart without grace. His pieces were clumsily Shovelled together and shipped back. in his summer's town The air is thick as paste, The streets ripple Like sheets of flypaper. Later, in its time, Everything will freeze.

Like all the rest, We wore slogans on our sleeves And argued military trust Across dinner-table leaves. Outside that game now, you warn: Two fingers raise in hope, or scorn. So they put you to the test, To see how much one man will resist.

Today breeze-swept rains washed Spring through my bones. Letters opened the day, as they can: I was grateful to learn of your late reprieve. Still, it seemed that this was like so many other breathing daysone more pause full of transparent calm-which you cannot control.

2.

ON THE NEW PEACE PROPOSALS MARCH, 1969 Outside, in a vacant Lot, bulldozers fight With the frozen earth. Everywhere, it seems, March will not give in To our hovering April. One year gone and still No closer to peace Tha.i a fool's ferecast Might figure us to be. I stir, drawn from one Window to another, Self-conscious, aware That all Spring pacing Is awkward and almost Beyond any repair. My days may all hang Heavily like thisI am allowed that grace. No doubt one of these Days would seem a year In South Vietnam. That is my grace too. The fact that I don't Understand how To accommodate it Is one month's spell, One season's vacancy.

I, the paralytic, the helpless friend, must watch this ancient Spring carry you in descent, in the vortex of its rage.
Summer spends heat, Autumn's embers fallno other season is at war with itself like Spring, and you will wear its mark, Now, as you thread choice so painstakingly, you. uncover all that's lost between situation and the self.

A DICTIONARY definition of the noun "project" tells us it is a " scheme" or a "design." Spelt with a capital' P,' it becomes the name adopted by a group of young Dubliners to describe what is certainly a comprehensive scheme and one of ambitious and praiseworthy design. Project has had its ups and downs, its successes and disappointments, but now, three years after its inception, it remains one of the most stimulating and dynamic artistic forces in Irish life today. Its terms of reference cover the entire spectrum of the arts and its targets incorporate an imaginative and wide-ranging series of activities. In the long term, Project is not so much I a programme but, very definitely, a I way of life. In 1966, Colm O'Briain, now a producer with RTE, asked Jim FitzGerald to do a theatre production at Dublin's Gate Theatre. " Fitz "

agreed and, in the course of rehearsals for three one-act plays (The Tiger, Double Double and The Lover), the two discussed the potential use that could be made of a theatre on Sundays. Realising that a number of uses could be made, the idea was thrashed out further and plans were made. Project 67 became the first step in the direction of an arts centre-the ultimate horizon. In November 1966, a multi-arts season opened at the Gate. It included plays and play readings, jazz concerts, classical music concerts, teach-ins (on censorship and on the theatre), an art exhibition and an experiment in theatre for children.

Plans and difficulties

The various interested parties divided up events between thempainting, music, sculpture, seminars, children's theatre-and started mak-

ing contacts and arrangements. In February of the following year, two rooms were offered to Project 67 by Tuck & Co. (Ireland) Ltd. above their premises in Lower Abbey Street. It was decided to form a cooperative nonprofit gallery for art exhibitions and reconstruction and renovating work proceeded apace. Simultaneously, the theatre side of Project 67 was planning another full season at the Gate for June, July and August. A number of productions were selected and tentative casts were arranged. Difficulties arose, however, in the shape of a misunderstanding about the Gate lease and in the end it was only possible to obtain the theatre for four weeks, with the result that the entire nature of what was already planned had to be changed. It was decided to do a classic production which would (it was hoped) set the group up financially for the season later in the year. The Beaux'
49

Strategem, directed by FitzGerald, was staged at the Gate. The production hit financial rock-bottom and shook the entire foundations of the outfit. At the same time, the Gallery was almost nearing completion. Were it not for this fact, and the group's commitment to the Gallery, Project might have submerged forever. But in July, 1967, the late Donogh O'Malley officially opened the Gallery and a series of exhibitions were mounted. The policy was to mix one-man exhibitions with group shows and the emphasis was on graphic works. Exhibitions by members of the gallery were sent to Dundalk, Ballydehob, and New York and an exhibition of graphics by Dutch artists was brought from Holland with the assistance of the Prins Bernhard Foundation.

NADYP comes into being

One of Project's plans for the longer season did not dissolve with the failure to obtain the Gate three-month lease. This was the formation of study groups to discuss the need for drama in education and theatre for young people. From these study groups, which met during the run of The Beaux' Strate gem, emerged the National Association of Drama for Young People. NADYP formally passed its constitution at its inaugural meeting in September, 1967. Its aim is to facilitate the development of theatre for children and young people, to encourage them to find expression through drama and to appreciate drama as an art form. The organisa-

tion has over 200 members, mostly professionals (teachers, actors and directors), with a number of active amateur enthusiasts. NADYP is a member of ASSITEJ (Association Internationale de Theatre pour l'Enfance et la jeunesse) and BCT A (British Children's Theatre Association); it also enjoys consultative status with the Department of Education. It has taken special account of the new Primary School Curriculum's suggestion to use "dramatic activity based on the child's experience, with simple dramatic presentation or miming of incidents from legends and classic tales." A wide range of courses, seminars and lectures have been arranged for members. Some of the events organised by the Association during 1968/69 included "Drama for Children in the Primary School," a practical demonstration with children by Aidan Rogers, Lecturer in Speech and Drama at St. Patrick's Training College, held in Carlow and Castleblayney; "Design for the Young Person's Theatre," a lecture by Lynn Avery, formerly of the Royal Court Theatre Company, which was held at Project Gallery; "Approaching the Scripted Play with Young People," a lecture by Colm O'Briain; "Theatre in Education Workshop," a three day course for teachers of primary, secondary and retarded children by Stuart Bennett, Colin White and Gordon Wiseman (members of the Theatre in Education Company, Coventry) which was held in V.C.D.; "Creative Movement," a five-week course on Wednesday evenings by Mona Wren, Vice-Principal of St. Raphael's College of Physical Education, Sion Hill, and held in the College; "Drama Summer Courses for Children " held in Artane, Kilmacud, Sheriff Street and Brunswick Street, Dublin, by twelve teachers; and " The Shoestring Theatre for Children," a company of drama teachers from England who performed three plays, The Reluctant Dragon, The Howler and The Frog at youth clubs and schools in Castleblayney, Dundalk, Navan, Palmerstown and Tallaght, and in Dublin at Cabra, Dominick St., Donnybrook, Drumcondra and Pearse Street.

the Association can also avail of a library service and information on films of related interest is also provided. Once every school term a newsletter is published and circulated to all members which keeps them in touch with the Association's events and progress. The newsletter reports on developments in the field of drama as a teaching method and carries interviews with prominent people, articles, reviews of recent publications, progress reports and other information. The Project Gallery had, meanwhile, been continuing with exhibitions, lectures for NADYP, and poetry readings. Last April, Tuck & Co. sold their premises and the new owner recommended Project to the Y.M.C.A. for a lease in their basement premises which had been formerly held by him.

Outside the Pale

As can be seen, the instructors and contributors are not drawn solely from Ireland but include persons of established reputation and accomplishment from abroad. (Also, it is clear, NADYP's range is not confined to an area within the Pale.) Members of

On June 9th a one-year lease to use the premises as an "arts gallery" was issued. Members spent the summer converting the premises (as our photo shows) and readying it for an Autumn opening. On 3rd September, the Minister for Finance, Mr. Haughey, officially opened the new premises and Project's inaugural exhibition (of paintings and sculpture by almost thirty artists.) It is envisaged that the gallery will also be a bookshop, a letterpress, the venue for poetry readings, jazz, classical and folk music concerts, courses and performances connected with NADYP and, early next year, experimental theatre productions working largely on the theories and techniques of J erzy Grotowski, the Polish producer.

The group matures

Past difficulties and exigencies experienced by Project have, in fact, paid dividends in strengthening its commitment towards its aims. Colm O'Briain, whose brainchild it is, claims (with justification) that the years of trying to keep the gallery going-of actually holding it together-have resulted in the maturing of the group as a group: "Our organisational mistakes now are far less than they used to be. And we all have a clearer picture of what we're at." Project has experimented with several forms of organisation. Now it has ten directors with no secretary or chairman. A weekly report is presented to a meeting of the directors. The gallery, at present, has about fifty members. Almost all are painters or sculptors. Membership is now being formalised with the introduction of a 3 fee because the group is in the process of being incorporated and licensed by the Department of Industry and Commerce as a charity. This is considered necessary not as a structural change but as a procedure for identifying the group. A deal of thought has gone into Project: there is a distinct motivating philosophy behind it as well as a force. It is best described by O'Briain, its articulate and energetic dynamo : " The guideline and most of the effort now lies in expanding the range of projects. This falls on the artists who, as soon as the group is more diversified, will hand over to the professionals in their respective fields. They will be responsible for their own finances, events and organisation. "We called it Project 67 originally because right from the beginning in 1966 we were looking ahead. We thought it would become what we wanted it to be in '67 but it didn't. But we are still Project towards an arts centre. When there is an arts centre that in itself will be the end of the project - we will have arrived at what we set out to achieve. After that other horizons will be necessary.

Brahms before soccer

"Ideally, an arts centre is a place with facilities for the performance of all the arts, facilities for all the artists to work (music rooms, foundries for sculpture, studios for painters, and rehearsal rooms) and leisure facilities for all the community so that if you want to play the piano, mess with clay, have a cup of coffee, you get it in the community arts centre. Leisure facilities should also include sportsyou should have showers, soccer fields and dressingrooms. And on your way

to the dressingroom you should hear Brahm's second symphony." "Joan Littlewood's dream of the fun-palace includes candy-floss and slot machines, but we feel these are already adequately provided for." (This comment was approved of emphatically by Project's Information Officer, Lee Gallagher, who remarked enigmatically, "It's not what the butler saw but what the butler can do that we are concerned with.") O'Briain feels that one of Project's main aims is to take away the mystique, to bridge the gap between the artist and the community. "Artists are professionals," he says, "so what they're doing is a committed piece of work: their audience is not a consumer audience - it's a leisure audience. " "The arts, unfortunately, are inextricably tied up with money. No matter how articulate you are, you are still depending on the old spondulicks. The traditional support for all the arts has been from the upper-middle classes. Project is trying to find a solution to reaching not only the upper-middle classes but also those areas that have been traditionally culturally deprived."

Bambis and plastic flowers

" What we would like to see happening would be, for instance in the case

of the woman who lives off the trading cheque, that instead of spending the last two pounds of her cheque on trivia (bambis and plastic flowers etc.) it would be within her range to put aside some of the cheque towards buying a painting, getting theatre or concert tickets, or towards books. This is a difficult thing to do: not only are you fighting educational opportunities that different sections of the community enjoy, but also their financial and economic liabilities and limitations. Some sort of success would have been achieved if this ever became possible." Whether it will in an Irish context is impossible to forecast but if not it will not be for lack of effort and imagination. A return to our dictionary, this time for a definition of the verb "to project," suggests, among others, " to cause to jut forward." This does appear particularly apt in the case of Project-over the last three years, substantial hard work, energy and initiative have indeed caused it to jut forward as something in the nature of a beacon. Permanency is a notoriously rare feature of organisations concerned in promoting the arts Dublin has witnessed too many pocket theatres and literary magazines disappear into a nostalgic Celtic twilight to aver otherwise. Project may, should and, one hopes, will prove an exception.

EVERY YEAR the Cork Film Festival is praised or condemned on the basis of the feature films screened. It is sometimes forgotten that the main objective of the Festival is to further an interest in the short film as an art form. This year the general standard of the sixtyone short entries was very high indeed but, as usual, the features were the talking point and tended to overshadow the real purpose. Too much publicity is given to so-called "controversial" features and not enough to the main objective in which Cork succeeds so admirably. In the General Interest Section the St. Finbarr Statuette Award went to the U.S.A. for Why Man Creates, a bitingly funny satire on man's attempt to find himself in a world of material progress. Combining cartoon and live action, it made excellent use of the medium and proved to be a very popular winner. Directed and scripted by Saul Bass, creator of the now famous credit sequence in The Man With The Golden Arm, it is worthy of a wide showing and I hope some enterprising distributor will give Irish audiences an opportunity of seeing it. The Shepherd (U.S.A.), about a shepherd searching for a job in New York, won the award in the Animated and Cartoon Section but personally I did not think it good enough, as it depended to a great extent on a closing one-line gag to make its point. The Hungarian entry, The Kidnapping of the Sun and Moon, made much better use of the creative possibilities of the cartoon medium, but its serious theme of the possible destruction of mankind would certainly not have made it a popular choice.

credit Irish audiences with a little more intelligence. The Jury decided not to present an award in the Short Fiction category as no single film reached the required standard. They did, however, award a certificate of merit to the Israeli entry, The Other Side. The U.K. entry, One of the Missing, admirably conveyed an atmosphere of tension and dread during an incident in the American Civil War and makes me believe that its young director, Anthony Scott, will find no difficulty in making his way into the field of feature films.

Controversy and Condemnation

The " controversial" Ardmore feature I Can't, I Can't, which opened the Festival, received far more attention than it deserved. A glossy, commercial production, it had pretensions to social drama but rarely rose above the woman's magazine level at any time. Had this film been made in Britain or America, I doubt if it would have received much critical comment, good or bad. However, the fact that the film was made in Ireland, and deals with contraception and extra-marital sex, made it worthy of a few newspaper headlines and condemnation by at least one notable figure. The fuss will probably be in vain because the film, at least in its present form, is unlikely to be screened publicly in this country and will probably receive scant attention abroad. Incidently, I didn't notice anyone walk out during its showing and no one was aware of any controversy until we read the newspapers during the week. Three Into Two Won't Go, with a script by Edna O'Brien, was a very entertaining version of the eternal triangle but with far more punch than usual. Director Peter Hall seemed happy to allow the cast dominate the film and Rod Steiger turned in a stunning performance as a salesman whose marriage flounders because of his involvement with a teenage hitchhiker. It's a pity this one is also unlikely to be seen on Irish screens. The characters are approached with sympathy and understanding and the treatment is by no means sensational.

tween a conquering Spanish general and a vanquished Inca king, and it questions the validity of imposing the Christian ideal on a civilisation that has built itself on the belief that the sun is God. It has a few excellent moments, especially the slow motion massacre sequence, but it all succeeded much better on the stage. Robert Shaw gives an interesting performance as General Pizarro and manages to convey the emotions of a man torn between his training as a soldier and his pity as a human being. But Christopher Plummer as King Atahuallpa steals the show. Near naked, and attempting a musical voice that sounds something like Neddy of the Goon Show, this incredible performance must be seen to be believed. It alone is worth anyone's money. That apart, however, it is a pity director Irving Lerner didn't use his camera to better effect. It could have been a great film.

One of the best Festivals

For me, the best feature of the week was Wajda's Hunting Flies, a Polish version of the American Mom cult. Its hero is dominated by his mother and wife, who plague him with day-to-day routine requests which drive him into the arms of an attractive young university student. However, it is not long before she also begins to spur him into similar tasks and he decides that returning to his wife is the better part of valour. This was a surprisingly slick production with first-class colour photography and a snappy music score. There is also a marvellous send-up of television programmes. (Every time the hero walks through the living room his aged father sits gazing at the screen and the same programme about fish canning is being transmitted.) I sincerely hope this one gets a Dublin screening. One pleasant surprise was an American film called Greetings. This was missed by most people because it was shown on Saturday afternoon and had not the benefit of advance publicity. It could hardly be called undergound but it was certainly sub-surface. Made on a shoestring in New York, it was a mixture of Andy Worhol and At Last the 1948 Show. Brilliantly vulgar, it satisfied everything from Vietnam to stag movies and really deserved a later showing. I would agree with Festival Director Dermot Breen that this was one of the best Festivals in recent years but I do wish the serious aspect of the short entries received better publicity. Maybe next year?

Subject matter and technique

The Films on Art category is often confusing because it can be quite difficult to differentiate between the subject matter and the actual film treatment. This year there was no problem because Test of Violence (U.K.) brilliantly detailed the paintings of Spanish artist Juan Genoves and managed to marry the subject matter with the film's technique so that the result was a cohesive whole, one depending on the other. This brilliant piece of cinema was so easily ahead of its competitors that there was no doubt about it capturing the award. It too is deserving of a very wide showing. The boring travelogues we see in most Dublin cinemas have earned the short film the poor reputation that it certainly does not deserve. Cinema managers should
52

Christian Soldiers
I had great hopes for The Royal Hunt of the Sun but it proved somewhat of a disappointment. Based on the play by Peter Schaffer the film betrays its theatrical origins with long stretches of dialogue interspersed with short passages of minor spectacle. Basically, the story concerns the confrontation be-

THAR T AR dha bhliain deag <> shin a bhunaiodh an Darner, Amharclann na Gaeilge. Is achrannach an saol a bhi aici 0 shin; thuas seal, thios seal, ach ainneoin san uile ta si fos ann, bee, mar a deirtear, agus ag chur fuithi ag 112 Faiehe Stiabhna ! Halla beag in ioslach an Unitarian Church ata inti; suiochain do thart ar chead duine. Ta curna ainnis go leor ar an halla agus nil na suiochain rochornpordach. Is beag teas ata san air. Ni dheanann an pobal freastal ar an air, is annamh bionn an teach nios mo na leath Ian. "Poll dorcha, tais, suarach," a thug cara liom ar an ait le deanai, "Masla don Ghaeilge," deir fear eile. Admhodh duine ar bith de lucht an Darner go bhfuil firinne, a bheag no a mhor, sa mheid sin. Cad 'na thaobh, mar sin, go leantar leis, no cen chineal duine ata sa Darner?

B6rd Stiurtha
Bord Stiurtha de chuigear, Bainisteoir agus Runai a reachtaileann an Darner. Ta cur arnach fairsing ag 'chuile duine acu ar an Amharclann. Dramadoiri beirt acu go bhfuil roinnt mhaith dramai scriofa acu, Ieiritheoir agus aisteoir duine eile agus aisteoiri go bhfuil baint acu leis an ait 0 bhunaiodh e ag Gael Linn, an chuid eile. Tagaid 6 aicmi eagsula den phobal; on lucht proifisiunta agus on lucht ealaine. Taid aontaithe i gcuspoir amhain, amharclann Ghaeilge den chead scoth a chur ar fail do phobal na cathrach seo. I measc na n-aisteoiri, ti muinteoiri scoile, Stat Seirbhisigh, cailini oifige agus fiu eolai no dho ; ceimithe Ollscoile a bhfurmhor. Labhras le roinnt diobh faoi aidhmeanna agus polasai na haite. Seamas Pairceir, Cathaoirleach Bhord Stiurtha an Darner, Leiritheoir, Aisteoir agus leirmheastoir. As beocht folaithe 1 measc na phobail chun drarnai i nGaeilge a scriobh, a saolaiodh an Darner. Freisin maireann beocht ealaionta ait a mbionn fonn ar dhaoine bheith ag aisteoireacht, ag leiriu agus ag glacadh pairt i ndramai Gaeilge. 6 thus, ni he ar fad go raibh an Darner ag iarraidh drarnaiocht Ghaeilge a bhru ar an bpobal i mBaile Atha Cliath, ach go rabhthas ag iarraidh freastal ar an riachtanas a bhi ann don obair seo; agus sruth cumhachta a fhaisceadh as an bhfuinneamh ealaionta a bhi i measc ar muintire.

Raison D'etre an Darner

Agus chun aon "ro-chraifeacht" a luafai le raiteas mar seo a scaipeadh,

machnaim laithreach orthu siud a chuir dramai den scoth ar fail don Darner, daoine mar, Breandan 6 Beachain, Eoghan 6 Tuairisc, Diarmaid 6 Suilleabhain, Sean 6 Tuama, Mairead Ni Ghrada, Criostoir 6 Floinn, Padraig 6 Giollagain, agus freisin ar na haisteoiri agus na leiritheoiri agus ar an lucht staitse a ghluais leo 0 "nead" an Darner isteach san Amharclann Ghairrniuil, isteach i Radio Eireann agus Telefis Eireann agus a bhfuil a gcion fein a dheanarnh acu chun saol culturtha an phobail a rathu, rinneadar siud ar fad a gcion freisin ar son an Darner. Is cuid de chlann an ti iad. Agus ta a Ian acu ag obair, nar rneasc i gconai, "An droch chaoi" agus gach a ngabhann leis, a luaitear go minie leis an Darner, ta se mar bheadh na dathacha; is mo de chomhartha beochta na a mhalairt e agus nior choir go gcuirfeadh se dul arnu ar aon duine faoi raison d' etre an Darner.

Maireann an Darner, ainneoin droch choras teasa, soilse agus an michompord. Maireann se ar phlana na healaine a eascrann as an scribhneoireacht agus as fiuntas na dtaispeantas. Is mor an bac e an "structtir fisiciuil " ar an gcineal fior-amharclainne is ga a chruthu agus a chaomhnu, ach nuair ata an rneid sin curtha dhiorn agam, agus ni ag moladh na ag leath-scealu na hainnise ataim, dearfaidh me go bhfuil sui1 againn cruth, curna agus aisieanna nios fearr a chur ar fail don lucht feachana agus do na haisteoiri. Cuirfear feabhas ar chursai le linn an tseasuir ata rornhainn amach. Micheal 6 Ruairc, Bainisteoir agus Aisteoir. "De reir chosulachta, nil moran suime ag pobal na cathrach seo san amharclann mar ata si. Caithfimid suim an phobail amharclainne i gcoitinne-ni hamhain lucht na Gaeilgea mhealladh. Chun e sin a dheanarnh caithfimid a chur ina lui orthu go bhfuil
53

dramaiocht na Gaeilge ina cuid fiorthabhachtach de dhramaiocht na tire. Thuig a Ian daoine e sin don chead uair nuair a mhol Harold Hobson An Triail, ach bhi An Giall agus cuid mhaith dramai fonta eile againn roimhe sin, agus ta scribhneoiri ag scriobh dramai tabhachtacha sa Gaeilge faoi lathair, Se an t-aon ghearan ata agam futhu nach bhfuil nios mo diobh ann. Sin fadhb an-mhor. Nil dothain scribhneoiri againn faoi lathair le clar iornlan de bhundramai a chur le cheile gach bliain. Nil aon locht agam fein ar aistriuchain, ach ba mhaith liom da bhfeadfaimis nios mo bundramai a fhail. Maidir leis na haistriuchain, Mach, cuimhnigh nach mbeadh seans ag pobal Bhaile Atha Cliath saothar daoine ar nos Salacrou, Fabbri, Andres, Pagnol, etc. a fheiceal murach an Darner. I mbliana beidh ar a laghad ceithre bundrarnai againn sa Darner."

baint leis a bhunu. Ansan beidh muinin ag na haisteoiri as an ait agus beidh tarraingt an phobail uirthi fosta.' -Criostoir 6 Floinn, Drarnadoir gur dheineadh leiriu ar dha dhrarna da chuid san Darner, Aggiornamento agus Cota Ban Chriost,

Nil na hudair ann!

Padraig 6 Siochru ; Iriseoir, dramadoir, aistritheoir. Iar-Stiurthoir Taibhdhearc na Gaillimhe. Mar bhall de bhord Stiurtha an Darner, taim lanchinnte dhe gurb i an fhadhb is mo ata againn na dothain dramai fonta nua-scriofa a sholathar, Nil na hudair ann! Nil siad ag scriobh! Nil furrnhor den mbeagan ata ar fail maith go leor! Da bhri sin bionn orainn dul i muinin na n-aistriuchan go rialta. Lochaitear sin cuma cad a dheinimid, agus lancheart ag an bpobal agus duine ar bith eile sin a Iochtu, Dar liom go measann dramadoiri go gcaithfidh siad drama "neamhchoitianta" a chumadh, e bheith "eaIaionta " Eorpach, Brechtach, Pinterach. Nil aon duine a ra nach feidir drama maith den deanamh sin a scriobh, agus na beadh eilearnh air. Ach ca bhfuil na dramai grinn no an fior go mairid beo. An measann daoine gur peaca e no " neamh-leiseachas " rud sothuigthe eadrorn aerach a scriobh. Feach mar d'eirigh le Aggiornamento le Criostoir 6 Floinn agus dramai Eoghan Vi Thuairisc, mar shampla. Ta fadhb eile, fadhb a bhionn ag aon bhord Stiurtha, Cuirtear drama nua ag triall orthu. Leitear e. Nil se oiriunach mar ta. ." bheadh se ceart go leor ach ta an t-uafas athraithe le deanamh air . . . bunsmaoineamh go maith ach! Athscriobh iomlan etc." Ce dheanfaidh e? An tUdar fein? An tUdar i gcomhairle le duine eile? An tUdar i gcomhairle le leiritheoir a mbeadh fonn air e leiriu, Freisin, ni feidir, agus ni ceart do bhord Stiurtha drama nach dtaitnionn leis, a bhru ar Ieiritheoir, Bionn droch thoradh ar a leitheid de "dheachtoireacht." Is cuimhin liom Ria Mooney a ra, trath go raibh mar leiritheoir sa Mhainistir, nach raibh ach an t-aon script arnhain riamh a cuireadh isteach chun na hAmharclainn an trath ud, narbh eigin cur leis na baint uaidh. Script le Joseph Tomelty. Is rno na riamh de chomh-iarracht e drama a ullrnhu don lucht feachana, de bharr teienici nua leiritheoireachta, oilteacht na leiritheoiri agus tionchur na scannan agus na telefise. Se an rei teach is fearr ar an bhfadhb na an t-udar a dhul i gcomhairle leis

an Ieiritheoir agus le " saineolai" eile, mas ga san, agus ar an mbealach sin nithe a chur ina gceart do na haisteoiri agus ansin bailiu leis agus an chuid eile fhagail faoin leiritheoir, Mar fhocal scoir, measaim go bhfuil geargha, aird a thabhairt ar an eileamh ata ag an bpobal ar dhrama sothuigthe (ni ga "e chur ar phlata ") a bhfuil greann eigin ann. Tar eis an tsaoil ta cearta ag an bpobal (pe hiad fein) . . . cearta sibhialta Amharclainne! . . . agus gan pobal tairnid gan dramaiocht, Agus nach fior e go bhfuil se nios deacra drama grinn maith a chumadh no an bhfuil? Dushlan I

3,000
Tugann an Chomhairle Naisiunta Dramaiochta deontas i gcabhair 3,000 in aghaidh na bliana don Darner. Labhras le Donnchadh 6 Suilleabhain, Runai na Comhairle"Si an aidhm a bhi againn nuair bhunaiomar an Chomhairle Naisiunta Dramaiochta, deich mbliana 0 shin, na Gluaiseacht Amharclainne na Gaeilge a chaornhnu agus a fhorbairt, tri na haiseanna agus an deis a chur ar fail do scribhneoiri agus do lucht na drarnaiochta a gcuid saothair ealaine a chur i lathair an phobail. Cuid den iarracht sin 'sea an Club Drarnaiochta. "Is de bharr chomhoibriu idir Bhord Stiurtha an Darner agus Bord Stiurtha na Mainistreach a hiarradh ar an gComhairle an Club nua Dramaiochta seo do reachtail, Feachtas comhaontaithe ata ann chun scoth an dramaiochta a chur ar fail don phobal ar chostas feasunta, Ta ionadaithe on Darner, on Pheacog agus on Mhainistir pairteach san obair seo .i, chun comhordu agus lar riaradh a chur ar a gcuid oibre agus leirithe fonta a chur ar fail do phobal amharclainne na cathrach.

Amharclann Lan-Ghairrniuil Ghaeilge

Noel 6 Briain, Leiritheoir agus Aisteoir: "Taim brean de dhaoine bheith ag caitheamh anuas ar gach rud sa tir gan tracht ar an Darner. Is doigh gur cine " knockers" sinn agus gur ga duinn a leitheid a bheith ar siul againn, ach tugaim faoi ndeara go mbionn an clamhsan is laidre ar siul ag an gcineal Ghaeilgeoir nach mbogann moran taobh amuigh de Thigh Neill. Ta gach ceart acu bheith ag casaoid ach amhain teacht agus na dramai d'fheiscint, Deintear drarnai san Darner ata ar ard chaighdean agus feictear dom go bhfuil muid ag chur le saol ealaionta agus culturtha na tire. Feicim mar aidhm romhainn arnach an la beannaithe sin go mbeidh Amharclann lan-ghairrniuil Ghaeilge ann a dheanfaidh freastal ar phobal mor na hEireann, ach ni Amharclann go lucht eisteachta, Ta se mar dhualgas ar aon duine a deireann go bhfuil suim ar bith aige i gcultuir na tire seo, agus 0 bheith ag learnh na nuachtan ta na milte acu ann, ta se mar dhualgas orthu seo tacaiocht a thabhairt duinn. Is cuma ce acu fior-Ghaeilgeoiri iad no a mhalairt, ta san fior." " Chomh fada agus a bhaineann se liomsa thaithn na leirithe a deineadh san Darner ar mo chuid drarnai, Bhiodar an-eifeachtach. Is doigh liom go rabhadar ar na leirithe ab fhearr a dheineadh ar mo shaothar dramaiochta. Biodh is go ndeintear sar-leirithe ann go minie, bionn an caighdean michothrom. An fath ata leis seo na go bhfuil tromlach na n-aisteoiri ann ag ple leis an aisteoireacht go pairtaimsireach. Chaithfear complacht gairrniuil go mbeidh seasamhacht ag
54

Tairiscint an Chlub
" Seo ata a thairiscint ag an gClub; dha shuiochan ag; ceithre drarnai san Darner; tri dramai sa Pheacog ; leirithe de chuid na Feile Naisiunta sa Pheacog ; leirithe de chuid na Feile Naisiunta sa Pheacog agus mar Bhonus i mblianadha shuiochan ag leiriu na Nollag sa Mhainistir, Seadhna coirithe ag an Ath. Padraig 6 hEachthighearn, B.Mus. Seolfar Ardan iris na Comhairle saor trid an bpost chuig gach ball. An costas in iomlan 3 3. O. Sin 3/6 an suiochan (suiochan dubalta), Ar an mbealach seo ta suil againn saol na hAmharclainne; a bheou agus an pobal rannphairteach linn san iarracht, Ta gach eolas faoin gClub ar fail on Stiurthoir Dramaiochta, 6 Sraid Fhearchair, Baile Atha Cliath, 2." SEAN A. 0 BRIAIN

Farrell and elected. Sir-Having just read NUSIGHT'S September issue and its long feature on the North, I feel that I must write to you, firstly, to congratulate you on the excellent use of so many first-class photographs and on your ambitious attempt to give in depth coverage to the confused situation here. Moreover, it is true that you give the People's Democracy far fairer coverage than many other papers. However, regrettably, the feature is marred by an incredible number of stupid factual errors. I shall confine myself mainly to sections VII and VIII, but within these short sections far too many shoddy mistakes occur. Ignoring the simple spelling mistakes, I bring your attention to:1. The PD was formed after a student sitdown in Linenhall Street, Belfast, not Guildhall Square, Derry-to be 70 miles out augurs ill for further accuracy. 2. In listing PD "leaders" you mention a " Fergus Keogh "-a mythical person. Your reporter presumably means Fergus Woods who stood against the nationalist MP Keogh. Moreover, Rory McShane has played little or no part in the development of the PD. 3. RSSF stands for the Revolutionary Socialist Student Federation-not " radical," as you state; furthermore, it has not existed at QUB since December 1968. 4. The activists' proposal for the Stormont march was only narrowly defeated-not overwhelmingly, as you claim. 5. The PD proposed, organised and held the " Long March " to Derry on January Ist to 4th. At no time did the CRA have anything to do with it. 6. Omagh has never had a PD, contrary to what you state. 7. A PD branch was formed by the people of Lurgan because the local CRA was the most spineless and inactive in the country-by no stretch of the imagination could they ever have been described as "militant," as your reporter does. 8. You state that McCann and Toman were elected to the NICRA in January. This is totally incorrect; only

Boyle of the

PD

were

9. You mention that two of the PD candidates in the election got } of the votes-you omit the fact that Woods won on the first count and was only " beaten" by 200 votes after 500 spoilt votes had been added to Keogh's tally. 10. Farrell and Toman at no time during last month's 'troubles' "fled the province"; they were working in Free Belfast and Free Derry. 11. Your picture on page 41 captioned "Captain Long" is in point of fact of the Governor Lord Gray of Naunton. 12. When precising the Burntollet book your reporter couldn't even get place names right. It's Knockloughrim, not Knockloughlin, and the first days lunch stop was at Templepatrick, not Dunadry. The alleged slogan chanted by the Bunting babes was of course " One teague, no vote," not of course " one vote." 13. Finally, and incredibly, in Section V on the October 5th march your " reporter" recounts how "without warning the police baton charged the crowd and drove them down WILLIAM STREET. The water canons were then put into operation. The marchers were driven back towards the Bogside.' This is just plain rubbish. The police assault took place in DUKE STREET over a mile away across the river, and 1t miles from the Bogside, As a result Duke Street became world famous-but not apparently to your correspondent. This is not just slipshod, it's deplorable. I notice that September issue has no letters. This I feel is a pity. If you wish to maintain your hitherto established reputation I suggest you print this letter-it was a pity to ruin a fine feature with so many errors, which only play into the hands of the Unionists. It should not be allowed to happen again. REV. A. BERKES,

The Orange Order must be responsible for much of the trouble up there. It is amazing that in a highly industrialised place like the north there is no strong Labour Party-the Orange Order saw to this with their marches-they got out their bloody drums often on, to engender hatred for the Catholics and in so doing made the Protestant workers forget about a Labour Party. The behaviour of the Orange Order down the years gives a perfect example of a bully at work. During the present century they bullied England into accepting them and bullied Ireland from having them, and so an unnatural boundary was set up in a small country to accommodate them. They have got control of this terrain for nearly 50 years during which they bullied their opponents out of houses and jobs. (Their opponents could be classed as those people under their jurisdiction who had a different religious belief to themselves.) So far, they have got away with all their bullying As everybody knows, a bully to be brought to his senses must get a helluva hiding, after which, of course, he is no longer a bully. The question is who is to give them their medicine-the British troops would redeem some past wrongs if they dished it out. FINBAR " Bramley," Orchard Close, Killarney. SLATTERY,

Sir-I felt I must say that it was well worth while waiting six weeks for the current issue of your magazine. Your coverage of the situation in the North of Ireland in scope and depth, together with the first-class pictures excellently reproduced, were unique in such exercises undertaken by Irish journals. One criticism-I feel it is unfortunate that your new cover format should be so noticeably and unsuitably derivative. MARY HIGGINS (MRS.)

Sir-Congratulations on your September issue. It must surely be the best bob's worth to come our way for quite a long time. Your coverage on the North was excellent.

Greenhills, Mather Road 5, Mount Merrion, Co. Dublin.

Sir-Many congratulations and sincere best wishes on the publication of NUSIGHT,which thrilled me very much. I hope that it enjoys popular appeal and is well received. It is well presented and should prove a great help in forming public opinion in this country. The riots of the North, of course, are still news everywhere. About them I want to say two things. Firstly, publication of these things are useful and helpful and indeed they might awaken public opinion south of the border to doing something beyond dishing up mere words, when something practical should be done in the desperate situation in which we are plunged in the North at this time. But some things should not be published and among these things I think we must include the private squabbles of members of parliament. These people talk and talk and talk and rarely offer a constructive proposal on the troubled waters. Instead they trouble the waters more by their invective and the poor people who must listen are caught up in this barrage of words. No doubt the M.P.s may have helped on the struggle for freedom and, no doubt, talking is their bread and butter, but too many words have been spoken. No action has come. No reforms. Little change in the administrative intolerance of the ruling wealthy. Secondly, there must be another way to Irish freedom. This must be anon-violent civil rights campaign, coupled with a deeper insertion into education in university and political life as a genuine weapon for the Irishman to gain a foothold in his native province. Thanking you for this new magazine and wishing it my blessing. JAMES Parochial House, Rouskey, Omagh, Co. Tyrone. J. McGEE, C.C.,

higher in many countries (including Ireland) as it is in the U.S.A. NUSIGHTis on its way to becoming a rather good news-magazine-s-don't let it be spoiled by this sort of nonsense. PATRICK Dublin Road, Swinford, Co. Mayo. McVEIGH.

Mick O'Connell
Sir-I got my first copy of NUSIGHT today and was delighted with it. Just one disappointment-the section on sport dealing with Mick O'Connell. While glad to see Gaelic games featured, I hope you will have their players and matches treated in depth. We get quite enough superficial sentimentality in our daily G.A.A. columns. Gaelic games deserve to be taken seriously. Every best wish. JOE LENNON. " Thanter Hill," Rinn Mhic Gormain,

Co. na Mi.

Sigmund Freud
Sir-Congratulations on your coverage of the North in the September issue of NUSIGHT. The article on Sigmund Freud was also well done but was marred by an unintelligent and childish first sentence in Part V (The Contemporary Scene). The percentage of people who need the services of an analyst is as high or
56

Sir-I have never written a letter of this kind before, but after reading your September issue of NUSIGHT I feel I must write to congratulate the writer of the sports pages. I have read almost every book and paper on G.A.A. and never have I read anything so interesting as your paper about Mick O'Connell. I have read everything there is to be read about this great sportsman, but this was the only writer that described the' real Mick O'Connell. I had the pleasure of meeting this great, unique man this summer on his beloved Valentia. I would like to thank this writer for the best article I have ever read about this great sportsman. To finish I would like to say what a wonderful magazine NUSIGHT is. I have never read it before. I saw it advertised on T.V. last week; the bit about Mick O'Connell made me buy it. Now all my friends are buying it. I certainly won't miss it; it's good value too, MARGARET Lacken, Duncormack, Co. Wexford. HOLMES,

On September 4 the death of Ho Chi Minh, President of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, was announced in Hanoi. Cu Bac (the revered Uncle) Ho was one of the elder statesmen of the twentieth century, a man who contributed significantly to the course of modem history and, by his actions more than his words, to the development of revolutionary socialistideology. As a patriot (one of his many aliases was Nguyen Ai Quoc, meaning Nguyen the Patriot) he was greatly loved by the Vietnamese people to whom he became, by virtue of his remarkable combination of restraint and persistence, a continual source of inspiration. To the

feuding theorists of the Communist world, Ho was an egnimatic figure who steadfastly refused to throw in his lot with either Peking or Moscow and who was consequently able to hold on to the support of each. Since the Geneva Conference of 1954 Ho Chi Minh's relationship with the Western world had become less and less direct. To most Westerners he was a sort of backstage figure, an old man whose indefatigable energy was largely responsible for perpetuating the interminable war in Vietnam. To others, including Third World revolutionaries and, more recently, radical students in Europe and the United States, he was

a symbolic figure who represented an external version of their struggle against a political and social order which, from within, they could do little to change. The real significance of Ho Chi Minh lay in the fact that he was everything that people thought of him. He was first and foremost a patriot, a man totally dedicated to the Vietnamese people, and this was the basis of his thought and his actions. At an early age he became convinced that revolutionary socialism was the only ideology genuinely sympathetic to people oppressed by colonialism and imperialism. In an age bedevilled with
61

ideological splits and splinterings, Ho adopted a flexibility which allowed him co-ordinate the energies of divergent groups. Essentially he was a believer in the patriotic revolution before the social revolution and so found himself in some considerable agreement with both Stalin and Mao, while his political experience in many countries made him sympathetic enough to the internationalist movement to feel no ideological qualms about enlisting the support of even the Trotskyists.

International Symbol
It is appropriate that Ho should have become, despite his nationalism, an international symbol. He was a widely travelled man, versed in many languages and familiar with many different cultures. Everywhere he went he seemed to gravitate towards the underprivileged, whether they were minority groups or deprived masses. It is strangely coincidental that he was very deeply moved by the conditions of the American negroes with whom he once lived, sharing the shame they felt at being coloured. It was their condition combined with the American involvement in Vietnam which brought about the first major questioning of Western, anti-communist mythology since the beginning of the Cold War. Ho's wide experience of humanity prevented him developing the kind of racialist outlook that characterises so many ardent nationalists. His political and social philosophy confirmed what experience taught him, namely that the patriotic struggle was aimed at a system which oppressed the masses in the home countries as well as those in the colonies. He also came to understand that the whole military-industrial machinery which perpetuates colonialism and imperialism can become quite divorced from the people and governments of the home countries. "The trouble is," he told an interviewer in 1965, "that Johnson is not in charge of the situation. It is the military men in the Pentagon who are now dictating American policy."

May 19, 1890, into a poor peasant family in north-central Vietnam. His father, a self-educated ardent nationalist, was dismissed from a post in the imperial administration for his refusal to learn French and for his involvement in rebellious secret societies. The Nguyen clan are everywhere in Vietnam and, unlike other great families, have never lost contact with the peasants and rural workers who constitute four-fifths of the people of Vietnam. The total population of Vietnam is about 31 millions, of whom 16t millions live north of the 16th parallel and 14! million south of the parallel. Of these, 26 million are ethnically homogeneous Vietnamese (the French called them Annamese) speaking a common language with the usual dialectic variations. The other 5 million are made up of the aboriginal "Montagnards" of the Central Highlands, clans and settlers, some of them highly cultured, others forming a kind of slum or jungle proletariat. In pre-Christian centuries the Vietnamese fought the Siamese Empire which extended into Tonkin, the northern province of Vietnam. Later they fought for centuries against the Chinese and enjoyed long periods of independence until Tonkin was incorporated into the Chinese Empire in 1406. By the mid-nineteenth century the " Emperor" of Annam, the Central province whose capital is at Hue, had established his rule over most of the country.

often ruthlessly suppressed and resolved to devote his life to achieving the independence of Vietnam. In January 1911, at the age of 21, the future leader took work in the kitchens of a French steamship and left Vietnam on a journey which was to bring him through the French empire in North Africa, France itself, England, North America, Russia, China, Siam (or Thailand) and Hong Kong. During his stays in these countries, Nguyen earned a meagre living by such work as shovelling snow or touching up photographs, devoted most of his energy to study and writing, learned the language of the people and became involved in the organisation of political parties and revolutionary cells. Through his many activities, including lecturing and the distribution of leaflets, Nguyen tried to focus the attention of the French people on the atrocities that were being committed in Vietnam. He quickly became known to many Vietnamese workers in France who adopted him as their champion. In 1920 he joined the French Socialist Party believing in the need for great co-operation between militant socialists in the imperialist home countries and the patriotic peasants and intellectuals in the colonies.

From Socialism to Communism

The split between the social reformists who favoured the reconstitution of the Second International, and the Russians and their supporters in the rest of Europe, who decided to found a new revolutionary Third International, was inevitably reflected at the 1920 French Socialist Party Congress at Tours. To his own, as well as everyone else's surprise, Nguyen found himself making an impassioned speech in support of the revolutionary Third International. As well as being a founder-member of the French Communist Party, he founded the Inter-Colonial Union, a body of nationalists from colonial territories, and edited their weekly publication. This was a polemical newsletter called Le Paria (The Outsider) through which he hoped to keep interest alive in the conditions of all the French colonies. As well as a playlet called the Bamboo Dragon, which he wrote to ridicule the Emperor Khai of Annam on a ceremonious visit to Marseilles, Nguyen wrote a pamphlet about this time which he called Le Proces de La Colonisation

The French
Then came the French, playing their part in the general drive of the Western imperialist powers to divide up Asia and Africa between them, under the usual pretext that peaceful traders and missionaries had been persecuted by the natives. They overran Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia, converting what they called "Indo-China" into a series of colonies and protectorates. By 1892 Cochin-China (the French name for South Vietnam) was given the status of colony; Annam was made a protectorate, still under the rule of its own king or emperor; and Tonkin was made a protectorate directly administered by resident French governors. By the year 1910, when Japan occupied Korea, the movement of revolt against capitalism and imperialism was beginning to spread from the West to the imperial possessions in Asia and Africa. That same year Nguyen Van Than finished his courses in a strongly nationalistic Lycee school in Hue. He saw sporadic revolts

Francais. A woman victim of one of the American bombing raids on Nth. Vietnam.

Ho's Origin
NGUYEN VAN THAN, or NguyenWho-Will-Be-Victorious, later to be known as Ho Chi Minh, was born on
62

He attended the Comintern Congress at Moscow in 1922 and, except for two short visits to France, remained there until 1925, studying at the Toilers of the East University. He was active in the establishment of the South East Asian Department in the Fourth Congress of the Communist International. He subscribed to Pravda, wrote two pamphlets - China and Chinese Youth and The Black Raceand showed the first signs of his lifelong determination to avoid doctrinal disputes in favour of action and empiricism.

going over to a strictly Leninist phase just yet, and it has been suggested that the decision to form a MarxistLeninist party was taken behind his back. While he was still in Thailand, the party was formed at a congress of Thanh Nien in Hong Kong. The result of this untimely action was irnmediate fragmentation. An Indo-Chinese Communist Party for Tonkin was set up by the Thanh Nien in Hanoi; the Thanh Nien in Cochin China established the Communist Party of Annam; and the League of Indo-Chinese Communists was set up by a rival revolutionary group. In January 1930, Nguyen summoned two delegates from each of the two ex-Thanh Nien splinter groups to Hong Kong. At a meeting which took place in a soccer stadium while a match was in progress, he provided

Return to Far East

In the year 1925 he accompanied the Borodin mission to China, ostensibly working as a translator in the Soviet consulate at Canton. There he formed the Revolutionary Youth League which brought young Vietnamese nationalists to Whampoa Military Academy for training under Soviet instruction. This league, more commonly known as Thanh Nien, provided the basis for the organisation of revolutionary cells throughout South East Asia. While Nguyen Van Thanh lectured on Marxism and made contact with the Chinese Communist Party, Pham Van Dong undertook the dangerous job of initiating cells in Vietnam. After the split between Chiang Kaishek and the Chinese Communists in 1927 Nguyen returned to Moscow. In 1928 he turned up in Thailand and travelled among Vietnamese exiles organising political groups and publishing newspapers that were smuggled over the border into Vietnam. By 1928 the working-class population of Vietnam had increased enormously due to French development of mining, cotton and weaving mills, and rubber plantations. In that year serious strikes took place in most of the major cities, including Saigon, Haiphong and Hanoi. As a result of these developments, Thanh Nien cells argued as to whether or not the time had come for the establishment of a Communist Party.

rebellion was staged later that year in northern Annam in which Soviets, knicknamed " Xo- Viets" to give them a nationalist ring, were established. They were also suppressed, and Pham Van Dong and Ton Duc Thang (now Ho's successor as President of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam), were both imprisoned. Ho was now on the black list of Surete, the French secret police, and was sentenced to death in absentia. He was arrested by the British authorities and charged with being a Soviet agent seeking to overthrow the Hong Kong government. A sentence of expulsion was repealed by the House of Lords and Ho then went to Singapore. Here, however, he was arrested, sent back to Hong Kong and once more imprisoned. The French failed to have him extradited and his British lawyer, convinced that the British and French police were acting in collusion and that his client's life was in danger, smuggled him out of prison and away to a Chinese friend's villa, where he stayed as a mandarin for a short while.

Renewed Exile
After spending some time working among Vietnamese exiles in Shanghai, Ho went to Moscow for the Seventh Congress of the Communist International in 1935 which came out strongly in favour of the line proposed by Ho and Dirnitrov: namely the creation of broad popular fronts in the struggles against colonialism and imperialism. These could involve any Democratic Nationalist groups which, in the case of Vietnam, included even French residents. At this Congress the ICP (Indo-Chinese Communist Party) was formally recognised. From 1934 to 1938 Ho studied in Russia, lecturing (sometimes in verse to facilitate memorisation) in the Lenin Institute under the name of Livov. He subscribed many articles to indigenous Vietnamese publications under the psuedonym Line, carefully avoiding ideological disputes. During this time he suffered greatly from tuberculosis. In 1936, Leon Blum's Communistbacked Popular Front government in France announced an amnesty in Vietnam and many of Ho's colleagues were released from prison. The ICP was now allowed operate legally on Indo-Chinese soil. This alliance between the Popular Front and the Communists lasted in France and in Indo-China till 1938.

both groups with a programme acceptable to each and instructed them to join the third splinter group and take it over. The party, whose name Nguyen had changed from the Vietnamese Communist Party to the more international sounding Indo-Chinese Communist Party, transferred its headquarters from Hong Kong to Haiphong and later to Saigon. In a ten-point manifesto issued by the Central Committee, Nguyen clarified the major priorityfreedom from colonialism before social revolution.

Imprisonment
A futile and ill-planned nationalist uprising took place in Annam in 1930 and brought about brutal reaction on the part of the French authorities. Despite Nguyen's warnings, another

The Indo-Chinese Communist Party

Nguyen Van Thanh's position at this time is difficult to assess. However, it is doubtful that he was in favour of

The Japanese
Meanwhile Japan from her base in Korea had invaded Manchuria and was starting on her Great Asian War

which was to last 14 years. Neither the League of Nations nor the Western Powers did anything to stop her till she bombed Pearl Harbour in 1941. With no opposition other than the Chinese she swept right through eastern China to South East Asia which she overran with the cooperation of Thailand, the French readily accepting her demands. In 1938 Ho had gone to China where the Japanese threat had reconciled Chiang and the Communists. In Mao's Yemen he found himself instructing Chiang Kai-shek's troops in guerrilla tactics. In South China in 1940 Ho rejoined his colleague Pham Van Dong, and was introduced to a young man who had been searching everywhere for the leader, carrying a photograph with which he hoped to identify him. His name was Vo Nguyen Giap. After sporadic Vietnamese uprisings in 1940 and 1941 Ho slipped back into

Vietnam and set up headquarters in a cave at Pac Bo, near the Chinese border. Here in May 1941 the eighth plenum of the Central .Committee of the IndoChinese Communist Party was held and a broad popular front known as the Viet Minh was established, involving other left-wing and nationalist groups. Giap, who was appointed as organiser of the military side of the Viet Minh, made a close study of the strategy of Mao Tse Tung. Later that year he was able to mobilise guerrilla propaganda units throughout Vietnam.

Imprisonment again
Ho saw the moment for revolt drawing near. The French were discredited for having sold out and the Japanese, who were fighting on many fronts, were over-extended. Using the name of Ho Chi Minh to convince Chiang's police that he was a Chinese journalist stationed in Vietnam and the name by which he is now generally

referred to, he set off to gain the support of Chiang and Mao for the Viet Minh. His disguise and his forged papers did not help him as he quickly fell into the hands of Chiang's police and was thrown in prison. He was extremely badly treated in prison and his health deteriorated. The main things that kept him alive were his writing (most of his poetry was written during this time) and his companionship with the other prisoners. The latter helped to sustain his faith in humanity through conditions that

Release and war against Japs

Meanwhile Chiang himself promoted the formation of a nationalist front to offset the Viet Minh by creating a "government in exile." The Viet Minh were to be excluded, but Ho's involvement was considered necessary, since he was the only figure with any support among the people of Vietnam. It was presumably on this basis that Ho secured his release after a year in " government" at a conference in Liuchow in March 1944. Ho then returned to the cave at Pac Bo and succeeded in dissuading Giap from an insurrection. In March 1945, the Japanese staged a coup and completely overthrew French rule in Vietnam. Ho advocated a campaign against the Japanese based on stealth. The activities of the propaganda units were stepped up and the American OSS, who had negotiated Ho's release with Chiang, contacted the Viet Minh,

who were now the only resistance to the Japs in Vietnam. Ho visited the Office of Strategic Services in Kunming and arrangements were made for the delivery of arms to the resistance fighters. To offset De Gaulle's expressed intention of recolonisation of IndoChina, Ho sent a manifesto of the Viet Minh's aims to General Sainteny, who was later to become France's main negotiator with Ho Chi Minh. The French Popular Front government, however, announced a plan in 1945 to keep Vietnam divided. On August 5 of that year Hiroshima was bombed and ten days later Tokyo was asking for an armistice. The Viet Minh acted swiftly.

Democratic Republic of Vietnam

On August 16, 1945, two days after the Japanese surrender, Ho Chi Minh called upon the people to rise up and take power in the name of an independent Vietnam. They answered the call under the leadership of the Viet Minh in almost every city, town and village from the far North to the deep South. Within seventeen days the Democratic Republic of Vietnam had been proclaimed with Ho Chi Minh as its president, the Emperor Bao Dai had abdicated, recognised the Republic and transferred his powers to the President, and Ho Chi Minh had broadcast a proclamation to the world inviting all the

United Nations to recognise Vietnam as an independent state entitled to equal sovereignty with all other states in accordance with the San Francisco Charter. On September 2, 1945, the day Ho Chi Minh had proclaimed the Democratic Republic of Vietnam an advance party of Ghurka troops was landed in Saigon. French forces also arrived in British ships and under the custody of a British general they entered Saigon shooting the Viet Minh out of the City Hall and other public buildings. Japanese prisoners were released, rearmed and employed alongside the British troops to suppress the "disorders" which broke out following the re-entry of the French later that month. The French general, Leclerc, swept ruthlessly through the cities and towns of the South, ousting the political representatives of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam and the Buddhist sects. Meanwhile Sainteny had arrived in Hanoi and informed Giap of an arrangement whereby the French were to re-occupy the southern provinces while Chiang would take over Tonkin. Small forces of Chinese proceeded to garrison the main towns of the north, including Hanoi, Haiphong and Hue. In the midst of all this turmoil, which was further aggravated by a fierce famine necessitating harsh measures on the part of the Viet Minh, Ho tried to negotiate with Sainteny.

Negotiation or War
The reinstating of the French was complicated by Chiang's presence and his tacit recognition of Ho Chi Minh. Therefore, the French High Commissioner in Saigon, Admiral d' Argenlieu, started negotiations with Chiang and made an agreement with the Chinese whereby French concessions in Chinese towns, such as Shanghai and Canton, would be abandoned in exchange for the sphere of influence in Northern Indo-China (including Toukin) which China had secured at the Cairo Summit in 1943. Tortuous negotiations then began between Ho and Sainteny. The French were anxious to secure an Indo-Chinese Federation and establish a French Union or Commonwealth composed of all the protectorates and colonies in Indo-China, but they wanted the status of Cochin-China to be decided on the basis of a local referendum. Ho Chi Minh, who saw the popularity of the Viet Minh increasing daily, wanted an independent and united Vietnam. As tension increased between the French and the Chinese forces, both of whom seemed out of the control of their respective governments, Ho tried to moderate between the varied components of the Viet Minh coalition. He saw the determination of the French to restore their lost prestige, and he saw that if war broke out between the French and the Chinese before some kind of an agreement was reached between France and the Viet Minh, the final settlement would be made over the heads of his government.

forming part of the Indochinese Federation and the French Union." D' Argenlieu, who had taken advantage of the Chinese withdrawal to move his own' troops northwards towards Hanoi and Haiphong and who had defied the policy of his government in refusing to readmit the political representatives of the Viet Minh to Saigon and other southern cities, had now set up a proFrench middle-class government in Saigon, thus hoping to sever CochinChina from the rest of Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh spent three months in Fontainbleau trying to persuade the French government to honour its agreement. However, it was not the first or last time that imperial forces operating in Vietnam were out of the control

Settlement and Swindle

Eventually, on March 6,1946, during a serious clash between French and Chinese forces in Haiphong, Ho Chi Minh and General Sainteny, on behalf of a new French popular-front government which had taken over after De Gaulle's resignation in January, signed an agreement whereby Vietnam was recognised as a free state within the French Union and the Indo-Chinese Federation, though the status of Cochin-China was to be decided by referendum. On this last point there would be further" frank and friendly" discussions. While he was on board a plane to Paris in June 1, 1946, to take part in these" frank and friendly" discussions, he learned by radio that the Republic of Cochin-China had been proclaimed in Saigon on Admiral D' Argenlieu's instructions, as " a free state having its own government, its own parliament, its own army and its own finances, of the home government and Ho achieved little more than platitudinous assurances.

The War with the French

Within days of Ho's return to Vietnam, French troops had occupied northern towns and on October 15, 1946, attempted to take over the Haiphong Customs Building. Ho's second war of liberation began. Under American pressure the French agreed to concede independence within the French Union to the whole of Vietnam. Bao Dai was to be invited to return to Vietnam as Emperor of a new" National Union Front" government, revoking his abdication and denouncing his agreement with Ho Chi Minh. Consequently on June 14, 1949, Bao Dai proclaimed himself Emperor, but added, to the alarm of

both the French and the Americans, that he would offer the choice of a monarchy or a republic in a referendum. On October 1, 1949, the Chinese People's Republic was proclaimed in Peking and on January 19, 1950, Mao Tse Tung recognised the Democratic Republic of Vietnam as an independent state. Within weeks the USSR and the other Communist countries had followed suit. John Foster Dulles of the US State Department retaliated with express support for" The State of Vietnam." This was a bizarre revival of the concept of state authority in the absence of de facto authority, which had not been in use, ironically enough, since the American War of Independence and the French Revolution. It had been dug up by the Americans to avoid having to recognise the new Chinese government. In Vietnam it took no account of the fact that the DRV was still, in spite of massive French and British interference, exercising political authority over threequarters of the territory and more than half of the population of Vietnam. The effect of this new concept of state authority on the US which was backing the defeated Chiang, moving the Seventh Fleet along the China coast and becoming freely involved in Korea, alarmed the French. They tried to ignore American advice, while accepting American aid. Finally they offered Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam independence within the French Union, establishing pro-French rule in Cambodia and in the parts of Laos not in the control of the left-wing Pathet Lao forces. They tried to persuade Bao Dai to abdicate his powers to a political regime in Saigon, but the Emperor once more proved stubborn.

French Defeat
On the military front the French had set in motion their Navarre plan. The strategy was to build up large bodies of troops and massive stocks of war material on the coastal areas and from these strongholds to launch enormous drives into the rural heartlands in which the Viet Minh had taken refuge. Simultaneously they were to seal off the frontier with China by moving in from northern Laos.

General Giap's strategy was to allow the enemy concentrate their forces in a junction of mountain roads between China, Laos and Vietnam, and there to surround them and seal them off from reinforcements. The name of the key junction was Dien Bien Phu. On May 8, 1954, while Viet Minh forces throughout the country kept the French pinned down in their bases, General de Castries surrendered to General Giap. By the opening of the Geneva Conference on IndoChina on May 4, 1954, the balance of military power throughout the north and centre and in the rural areas of the south was decisively in favour of Ho Chi Minh. Throughout the eight years of the war with the French, Ho made repeated appeals to the French people. However, communications with the guerrilla leaders had to come through the High Commissioner in Vietnam, and d' Argenlieu frequently intercepted dispatches and even envoys from France to Ho Chi Minh.

Geneva and After

After the failure of Ho's negotiations with the French in 1946, it was surprising that he was able to hold on to the leadership of the party and the support

of the people. It was even more surprising that he had the power to bring the party once to the conference table at Geneva in 1954. The ICP, which he had dissolved in 1945, had been reconstituted in 1951 to replace the broad popular-front of the Viet Minh and was now called the Vietnamese Workers' Party. The name itself showed at least a concession to the hardliners, who had never been too sympathetic to either the Viet Minh's popular front policy or the compromising agreements with the French. Besides, the victory of Mao Tse Tung and the open support of Communist China created a strong pro-Chinese wing, the most significant of whom was Truong Chinh, the main theorist of the new Vietnamese Workers' Party. Nevertheless, Ho personified the struggle against both the Japanese and the French and his hand is clearly visible in the DRV's acceptance of the final settlement at Geneva in the person of Pham Van Dong. In every respect the settlement was unfavourable to the DRV. Western Intelligence sources were agreed in assessing that Ho Chi Minh's popularity would have won him a four-to-one majority in any free electoral contest with America's Ngo Dinh Diem. The proposed military boundary bore no relation to this popular support, as the 17th parallel, where it was to be set, was merely a geographic mid-point. Nor did it bear any relation to the military advantage gained at Dien Bien Phu, The DRV would be compelled to withdraw 100,000 troops and guerrillas, most of whom were southerners, to the north, while the few

Vietnamese supporting Diem of the French would have to make no withdrawal at all. On the question of nationwide elections to be held within two years, Ho had absolutely no guarantee that either Diem or the Americans would feel bound by an agreement on which they refused to vote. It seems that once more Ho over-estimated the amount of pressure he was capable of bringing to bear, this time on the Americans through the French and the other signatories of the agreement. After the Geneva Conference Vietnam kept a vacillating friendship with both great communist powers, Russia and China. After 1960 with an increasingly large war on its hands, Russia, the greater military power, was dominant. But in the last year China has begun to recover from the Cultural Revolution and relations with and aid to North Vietnam have been extended. Ho Chi Minh remained dominant in internal affairs. After the failure of Truong Chinh's agrarian collectivisation programme in 1956 Ho took over his duties and indicted him for serious and collective errors. In the following year the pro-Chinese faction attempted to seize power while Ho was in Eastern Europe. On his return this effort was crushed. Relations with China became weaker with the failure of the Great Leap Forward in China in 1960. In the early 1960s Ho campaigned strongly to stop an open breach between Russia and China. At this time he refused to acquiese in the Soviet witchhunt aimed at throwing the Albanian party out of the World Congress just as he refused to allow the same thing to happen in China eight years later. Between 1962 and 1964 the proChinese group benefited from the worsening relations of the two powers and Ho's star grew dim. By 1965 he was fully returned to power. By this time a large scale war with the U.S. was in progress and good relations with both powers was logistically essential as was national unity in the face of enormous U.S. attacks. Ho's policy of national struggle overcame the clear need for class struggle. Vietnam only managed to pursue such a frighteningly debilitating war by forging a new national unity of the classes. Ho's significance in this phase cannot be under-estimated. He symbolised, led and ideologised the national struggle. He led the propaganda of the war which was to persuade much western opinion that the war was national as well as communist. This had the effect of creating a crisis in the cold war mentality among the professional classes in the U.S.

DETECTIVE SERGEANT "Lugs" Brannigan is probably the most famous policeman in Ireland today. He is admired by most young Gardai as an example of what they, minus his features, would want to be. I remember a young Guard telling me that he had . just heard that Brannigan had put six people in St. Vincent's Hospital an hour earlier. The young garda seemed to think this an exemplary achievement. The force admires him for his fearsome reputation in Dublin and his image as a good, fearless cop. He is known as " Lugs" throughout the city because of his ears. They are large and unwieldy. For years he was a heavyweight international boxer and after that an international referee. But hitting people in the ring was only a pastime; his joy for thirty years has been that of leader of what is popularly known as the Riot Squad. They are called "Red Cars" officially and can be called to any part of the city where there is trouble. The red cars aetual1y consist of one car and one van. The van carries two members of the Riot Squad and a few British-trained Alsatians to pacify difficult members of the public. The car carries Lugs and two or three other members of the squad. Every night of the week they tour the city seeking to quell troublemakers.

Surprise to meet
For one who is so feared and hated by very many people, he is quite a surprise to meet. He is a quiet, gentle and childlike sort of person. He has a quite normal suburban house out past Dolphin's Bam. The house has a well-kept back garden where two pet Alsatians play. These may, of course, be retired riot squad dogs. Lugs' career began back in the 1930s when he "had a choice of taking the boat to America or joining the force." There was a lot of unemployment in those days and widespread juvenile crime. Brannigan proved himself in 1938 when he dealt with a gang called "The Animals." "The Animals" was a gang centred in the slums in the centre of the city. "The gang were mixed up in a bookie crowd," he informed me. They used to attack bookmakers who were not too popular with 'other bookmakers. "Lugs "-" quiet, gentle and childlike sort of person
tt

Transfixed by a fishknife
Brannigan dealt with them at a meeting at Baldoyle racecourse. He searched

and questioned twelve well-known members of the gang as they entered the course. However, he must have made an unfortunate oversight because three hours later a bookie was found transfixed by a fishknife. "Luckily it hit nothing vital," continued Brannigan. This knife was used to gut fish and it must have been quite an oversight to miss it since it was a foot and a half long and serrated on both sides. But with a different sort of efficiency Brannigan arrested seven of the gang at the course and four of them that night. "The last one got away," he remembered wistfully. Within a month all eleven were despatched to Mountjoy and "The Animals" were put paid to for the time being. This success persuaded the authorities to formalise a riot squad and Brannigan was made its head. He remains at the helm today. The fifties were the toughest time for Brannigan. Ten gangs flourished in the city. Nightly they used to attack

each other with knives, knuckledusters, belts, sharpened toecaps and chains. They attacked Brannigan, of course, whenever he appeared. Police were not very popular in Dublin at the time. Some members of the force had boiling water poured on them when passing the flats in Corporation Place. The riot squad got it hardest.

The Animals
Juvenile crime was rife in the city. There were no jobs at all for schoolleavers. Wages were low and drink was the only entertainment available for the denizens of the new housing estates and slums in the city. " The Animals" were once again the biggest and best gang in the city. They used to attack the police regularly. The Riot Squad, in their view, were asking for it anyway. They were never the most intelligent part of the force. Two of the least bright of them really got it hard from "The Animals". One night, to their delight, they saw a single unguarded "Animal"
69

--------------------walking home. They chased him and saw him running into an empty building. Thinking they had him, they eagerly followed him in, whereupon they were attacked by about fifty " Animals" with knives, lighted cigarettes and fists. Fortunately enough they survived. Brannigan did not escape either. He keeps a selection of their armoury in his bedroom. All of these he used as evidence in Court when youths were charged with personal assault on himself. He never wears a shirt at home, so it was a simple matter for him to show some of the effects of these weapons. Opening his jacket he proudly displayed his chest. It has round welt marks where studded belts hit him. Stitches where knuckledusters tore some skin off and various different coloured areas which healed less well than the rest. Far from being selfconscious of this, he is rather proud of it. "I gave what I got," he informed

FEATURES --------------------appears everybody listens eagerly for a really good story. Such a case appeared last month when Brannigan "took the bull by the horns and attacked the dog" when he had a dog set on him in Ballyfermot. The dog naturally took off and was chased by Brannigan along with its master. delinquent unless there is plenty of evidence. Brannigan's main worry is the small penalty which can be imposed for breach of the peace. The maximum fine is 2. However,the Criminal Justice Bill will solve this problem. In the meantime Brannigan finds it very helpful if he is assaulted. His presence very often is sufficient to effect this. If he is not assaulted he falls back on methods which have become part of Dublin's mythology.

Reluctant Fare payers

Things are quieter now. " There are a few bowsiesin every area but the worst places are Corporation Place and St. Teresa's Gardens," he claims. But mostly he has more mundane jobs now. One of these is following the last bus from Bray on Saturday nights. Another is following the 78 bus from Ballyfermot, On these routes he regularly deals with great efficiency with passengers who won't pay their fares He spends a lot of time in Bray because during the summer tourists fight outside pubs nearly every night. He also follows the Sands Showband. "They attract a bad crowd, real bowsies. Although the lads themselves are very decent lads." When they play he makes forays through the packed dance-hall to forcibly remove drunks. Things are not that safe nowadays for him. Pointing to his upper lip with his characteristic crooked smile, he informed me that it was dead. Two years ago a drunk stabbed it with a knife.

Brannigan arrests, preferable

It is easy to condemn such behaviour. But some things do need to be borne in mind before any such judgement is passed. "Brannigan is not unique. Our . borstal system is particularly primitive and vicious. Neither are our police as a whole so good and when it comes to a position where blows are exchanged, Brannigan is a good deal safer than the ordinary raw Guard." The hapless marchers and bystanders who were attacked by the police outside the British Embassy recently will testify to this. While Brannigan's statement " I never hurt " may be an overstatement, he has never killed anyone which in thirty years of combat, is a remarkable record. The ordinary policeman is not as expert as Brannigan nor as careful in his aims. When Brannigan retires in two years he will take a rest he does not want.

me. Stigmata on legs

He is, however, even more proud of his legs. These got more abuse since the most usual retaliation of drunken youths on his arrival was to kick him on the legs. Sometimes they kicked him with ordinary shoes, sometimes they kicked him with sawn-off toecaps. Anyway he pulled up his trouser legs and showed his wounds. He regards these in the same manner as stigmata. His legs are a mass of scar tissue. There are lumps on them, some of which are black and others which are bright white. This scarred terrain extends to the kneecap. Above that he left to the imagination. During this period Brannigan not only left his mark on some of the most respectable fathers in Dublin today, but endeared himself to the District Courts. With so much juvenile crime, life was difficult for the District Justices. All they wanted to do was despatch, as quickly as possible, the culprits which turned up daily before them. Brannigan helped them enormously. He was a witty, quick, efficient witness. If he decided to bring a young lad to Court the force of his evidence left the latter little chance of acquittal. Not that Brannigan was inhumane. Even on stabbing charges he could get people off. "If a lad had decent parents I did my best for him," he said. This pleased the Justices no end. They had little sympathy with the sociological type of justice which saw that perhaps fellows with indecent parents or unemployed parents were more entitled to leniency. Brannigan remains the darling of the District Court. When he
70

Paralysed
A short while ago he got a tremendous blow on the forehead. That explains the large brown birthmark here. In fact it is not a birthmark but a freckle. When it was hit it started spreading like a cancerous haematoma and now covers most of his forehead. Shortly after that mishap he ran into more trouble. While passing a drunk he had just pacified in Kevin Street Garda Station he got a vicious blow on the side of his face. The drunk was pacified again, but Brannigan lay stunned on the floor. He was paralysed over the whole of the left side of his face. He could not talk or move it at all. Slowly it thawed out, but left some muscular weakness. For that incident he was awarded damages in Court, which he was not paid. Altogether it has been a hard life for Brannigan, but as he says, "I love police work." He is proud of the law and order he has brought to the city. He is no coward and the pacification programme for each new industrial estate in Dublin has been led by him. However, the law and order he has brought Dublin has left him problems. This is the Law itself. Youths nowaday knows more about the laws of arrest and Justices feel less inclined to intern a

SOME ADVICE FOR SERGEANT BRANNIGAN

Manner of Arrest.-A Garda in making an arrest should actually touch the offender's body, or otherwise restrain his liberty. Therefore, if a Garda merely touches the party to be arrested through the broken pane of a window, saying, "you are my prisoner," it is a good arrest. Bare words do not constitute an arrest, so that merely requiring the person to go before a Justice is not an arrest, but if the Garda says, "I arrest you", and does not touch the person addressed, but the latter acquiesces and goes with him, this will be a good arrest, though it would be otherwise if instead of submitting he had escaped. If a Garda comes into a room where the person to be arrested is, tells him that he arrests him and locks the door, this is a good arrest, for he is in the custody of the Garda. - The Garda Siochana Guide (Fourth Edition, 1966).

AS WE go to press the 1969 Festival has not yet reached the half-way mark, and so any evaluation or even any prophecy would be at best purely speculative, a judgment with but half the evidence heard. Yet some productions have a definite interest in their own right and may provide a foundation on which to build a sub-

sequent, more complete assessment. The Festival, it can be argued, is more than the sum of its parts, but every part contributes to the Festival as a whole. Accordingly, let us look at three productions considering each as an isolated item subject to critical evaluation as such, and then, tentatively, we will consider it in relation to something

larger, but as yet incomplete. The plays we have chosen-and be it noted this is an arbitrary, personal choiceare The Immortal Husband by James Merrill at the Gate, The Assassin by John Boyd at the Gaiety, and SWift by Eugene McCabe at the Abbey.

"The Immortal Husband" by James Merrill (The Gate)

Everything we have seen of American drama in Dublin over the last ten years leads us to expect something consciously, aggressively revolutionary like the Antigone or the Frankenstein of the Living Theatre of America, something violent and .strange like The Indian Wants the Bronx or Keep Tightly Closed in a Cool, Dry Place, something stridently searing like Virginia Woolf or something smoothly sophisticated like The Odd Couple or Two for the See-saw. We had no reason to look for anything as gossamer-like as Ring Round the Moon or The Second Kiss, yet that is what The Immortal Husband, presented by the Artists' Theatre of America isa play that can only be described as a poetic drama. Fact, however, before comment; this piece, says the programme note, is based on a legend that the Goddess Aurora gives a young man immortal life without giving him what he really wants-immortal youth. Those who demand that the Theatre shall provide slices of life, or be committed to a philosophy, or serve as a piece of social engineering will fling up their hands in holy horror and ask what this mythological mush-mush has to do with anything, let alone why it should be presented at the Dublin Theatre Festival. The answer is deceptively simple-the thing happens to be intensely theatrical. To begin with, it is a delight to the eye and to the ear, to go on with it has a quality of excitement such as MacLiammoir and Edwards could evoke in the golden age of the Gate, but which has evaporated in these later, graver times. Back, however, to fact; the play is in three acts, the first set in England in 1854, the second in Russia fifty years later, the last in Southampton, U.S.A., in 1968. An immortal Aurora, ageless, beautiful, amoral, falls in love with a youth called Tithonus, a name which he will keep in all places at all times. When we meet him first he is the young Romantic rebelling against order, middle-age, everything except youth. In opposition to him is The Other, Older Woman, here a staid companion embodying level-headed cool-judging acceptance. When we see Tithonus for the last time 104 years later, he is bed-ridden, but in full possession of his faculties, sharp enough to realise that Aurora is about to leave him for a new young man, a fresh Tithonus, and that his best friend will now be the same Older, Other Woman, once negative, dressed in black, a governess, but now transformed to a cool figure in white, a nurse. She
72

cannot take away his immortality, but she can make his later days more tolerable. Young love, middle-aged love, old love, idealism, doubt, acceptance, our human seasons, these are all inherent in the mortal predicament. The play catches them with exquisite precision, tenderly, flippantly on occasion, compassionately always, and shows Man immersed in Time, his love changing its nature with his seasons. It is all fantasy, of course, but poets' fantasies have the distressing trick of proving the very stuff of reality. The characters, however, are definite enough, Tithonus self-centred, in love with love or with himself perhaps, Aurora, lonely in her immortality, failing to be human and for one terrible instant regretting it, The Other, Older Woman tranquil because she has rejected ecstasy and has accepted life and death as conditions of being mortal. The play, humorous, elegant, lyrical, belongs entirely to the stage and not to the pulpit, the printed page, or any other medium. What it has to say may be done indirectly but its impact is immediate. As a Festival offering this production has three great virtuesit reminds us that there is more to life than conventional realism, that there is more to America than mere stridency, and it has the indefinable but unmistakeable spirit of Festival, the very breath of Harlequin and' Columbine.

"The Assassin" by John Boyd (The Gaiety)

In sharp contrast comes John Boyd's The Assassin, no fantasy with ethereal Goddesses and eternal youth but a report on blood and violence in Belfast where fanatical evangelists enter politics and gentle idealists can suddenly turn into cold-blooded murderers. We are shown the electoral triumph of a certain Reverend Colonel Luther A. Lamb and how he is struck down in the very moment of victory, a picture of the present and a portent for the future. Mr. Boyd uses several comparatively modern devices, a series of short isolated scenes instead of a continuously developed argument in three acts, a number of flash-backs in place of a continuous time sequence. He brings in one of the oldest theatrical devices, the Chorus, using it just as the Greek dramatists did to comment upon and to point up the action while not directly influencing it, but his is a twentieth century Chorus, a single Television commentator instead of the traditional dozen or so citizens or widows or vestal virgins. He furthermore seeks to involve his audience actively by having his crowds shout

from the stalls and the circle, and by showering the patrons with leaflets. Those looking for an immediate committed Theatre concerned with the politics of here and now should have been pleased with the piece, yet even the strongest supporters of political plays and the champions of documentary drama seem to feel not quite satisfied. The reason for this, like the reason for the success of The Immortal Husband, is deceptively simple. To begin with, The Assassin is not of itself theatrical, and to go on with, the drama presented by Mr. Boyd on the stage is far less exciting than the drama provided by the Bogsiders, the B Specials, Major Bunting and the Rev. Paisley in the streets. A theatrical experience involves concentration of fact, but here we have a dilution of it. The piece is an analysis, painstaking, sensitive enough if rather limited, of the factors which have led to the situation across the Border. The pieces are assembled, combined, and the result shown to be inevitable, much as one might assemble the pieces of a motor car, combine them and show how the completed machine must function. But no demonstration, not even of the Internal Combustion Engine, can transmit the urgency inherent in authentic drama. What happens in the theatre involves author, actors, and audiencedetachment means death, and here, we felt, Mr. Boyd is detached. He is nearer to his Chorus than to any of his characters and it is surely no accident that he himself should be a Radio and Television producer. The Assassin would probably be very effective in the cinema; in the theatre it lacks all the immediate impact to be found, for example, in Sam Thompson's Cemented with Love. There are a number of scenes in the lives of the Reverend Colonel and of his executioner, but these are "stills," not stages in development, illustrations, not actions. All the time we are conscious of the author as technician so that we remain unmoved or at best feel a little subdued at the spectacle on a stage in front of us of happenings which in real life are distant enough for us to ignore. Mr. Boyd's analysis of the tragedy of Ulster is not very profound-he is content to leave it as a matter of childhood background and religious prejudice while he ignores the social and economic implications and only occasionally does he attempt any direct confrontation of ideas. When this happens, as in the scene where a wise but utterly unglamorous Rector questions Lamb's evangelical fireworks with a group of parishioners who have just

been having bayonet instruction from the Reverend Colonel, the play becomes more alive, but having stumbled on this dramatic confrontation, Mr. Boyd tiptoes silently away from it. The play has the same consciously defined, immensely competent relation to the T.V. medium and the T.V. audience which one dislikes so much in the work of Mr. Hugh Leonard. There is something just too clever about the scene between Stevie, the assassin, and his girl-friend Bernie, something too glib in the sybolism of her gift to him of a scarf which he is inclined to reject, even as he stresses his independence and consequent rejection of marriage. This is not above the heads of the average T.V. customers; if they miss it, no matter, if they spot it, they feel pleased-but this is not honest Theatre. All of which having been said, should The Assassin have been put on at all, and is it a proper play for a Festival? To both questions the answer is an unequivocal "yes." It may not be a good play, but it serves to show what the Theatre can do; it attempts to handle a serious issue seriously and in a way which will set the audience thinking. One of the great defences of the Dublin Theatre Festival is that it lures into the theatre people who might never come during the rest of the year; such patrons will find in The Assassin a fine demonstration that the Theatre is not a highbrow pleasure far removed from life, but that it must come close to the passions and concerns of ordinary people.

" Swift" Eugene McCabe (The Abbey)

And lastly Eugene McCabe's Swift at the Abbey. Of the three pieces we are considering, this is the most difficult to tie down, to state what the author is trying to do. We see the dying Swift alone, conscious of his own precarious mental balance, aware of where his life has failed, of how close at times he has come to his own despised Yahoos. We are made to share his frustrated tormented feelings with him, his inability to do anything constructive for any of the people he loved so passionately, his cosmic anger against mankind which recoils upon himself. The play is not an analysis like The Assassin; it is direct experience. It grows on us, gaining strength and urgency as we plumb for ourselves the depths of darkness in the Dean. The production has many irritating features ; often Michael MacLiammoir loses his words in his distinctive style of speech, always Angela Newman
74

remains her unmistakeable self, the willing suspension of disbelief is made about as hard for us as possible because our Dublin actors seem to know only one way to play. Yet in the end the play hits us; those who could speak uncharitably at the end of Act 2 of the combined ages of the players enacting Swift and his mistress, came out after the final curtain speaking of Hamlet and the Book of Job. Here is the Theatre once again making a direct lyrical impact, tightening our awareness, rousing our compassion whether we like it or not. Yet by most standards Swift should have failed, for the dramatist's purpose was by no means obvious. Was he seeking to explain Swift, to investigate human relationships, or to show the ultimate, inevitable, human isolation? There was an uncertainty in construction which inevitably transmitted itself to the audience but which in the end made precious little difference. Hilton Edwards has always maintained that Irish actors have an innate quality, usually undisciplined and unknown to themselves which in its direct application has all the virtues of Primitive Art. Other Irish actors, he believes, if truly dedicated and susceptible to discipline can be trained into the finest professional performers in the world. But there is a hinterland, the

realm of semi-professional companies and West End comedy for example, in which we wallow lamentably. Possibly something of this applies to Swift. It has a direct fundamental power and succeeds precisely because of this basic sincerity, precisely because it is not a well-made play conforming to the sound traditions of historical drama. If Mr. Boyd is too much the detached technician, Mr. McCabe is the agonised creative Primitive achieving by instinct far more than discipline and technique could have brought him. So in its weaknesses, and in its strengths, Swift emerges as peculiarly and distinctively Irish and so a proper Festival offering. What conclusion then can we draw from this preliminary and limited examination? We have seen three plays differing completely in matter and manner, yet each providing at least one pointer to what is a good play, and which in conjunction, seen as three parts of one larger entity, gain from their setting inside the framework of the Festival. Every evening has set us thinking about the ideas in the individual plays and about the Festival as a whole; on this evidence alone we can say that this year's Festival has already proved its vitality.

WE IRISH frequently strike our visitors as an introspective lot, highly sensitive as to what others think of us, especially when we are on exhibition, as at the Theatre Festival. Towards the end of the Festival's first week NUSIGHThad the chance to discuss it with three eminent visiting critics,' Eric Shorter of the Daily Telegraph, Wolf Kauffman, who writes a column syndicated in about a dozen major American papers, and B. A. Young from the Financial Times. It was too early in the Festival for much discussion of individual plays, or for the construction of orders of merit. So, the conversation ranged rather widely. How often had these gentlemen come to Dublin for the Festival? Shorter wasn't sure if this was his ninth or tenth campaign. Kauffman claimed all but one of the Festivals, and Young admitted himself the new boy of only five years' standing. Why did they keep coming, we asked. Partly, as Kauffman said, because this was the only festival of its kind in the world, the only one devoted exclusively to drama, and partly because this was Dublin. The two ideas seemed to interreact, to produce a third incentive; there was always the hope that here in Dublin at our festival some major dramatic event might happen, and that there might be some moment of lI'eat excitement. Somewhat to our surprise they were manimous that by and large over the jears they have not been disappointed. Kauffman's approach to the theatre and the festival was almost lyrical. " Those of us who make our living in this strange and dubious professioncalled critics-we are called assassins, we're called all sorts of things, but actually we spend up to twenty hours a day being excited by the prospect of going to see another play, because we always hope that it is going to be something very wonderful. Unfortunately, I frequently go away disillusioned. But there is that thing which builds up, five o'clock, six o'clock, seven-at eight I'm going to see a new show and that's the one that I shall remember, and I'll be able to say good things about it, for not only tonight in my copy-but this is the thing that is wonderful for me-here in Dublin, during this two weeks
76

every year I have this very concentrated feeling that I'm going. . ." All of them insisted on two things. The astonishing amount of theatre in Dublin compared with any city of comparable size in the world, and the value of the festival as a concentration point. Kauffman stressed the first: " There are four theatres in Dublinregular full time theatres-that's about twice as many as you have in most other cities of the world, with the exception of London, Paris and New York. Most cities the size of Dublin have one theatre, if that, and they're happy." Shorter dealt with the second idea: "I don't know whether we're looking for new plays. It's the activity which is important, isn't it? I don't think it (the Festival) does much for tourists. The main idea is that it brings a lot of dramatists or would-be dramatists, actors and producers together, working intensely for a fortnight, and we come and look at it. But that's because we're connoisseurs of the theatre," Young supported this: "I don't think it would matter if you didn't have anything outstanding each year. You've got so much encouragement to native writers to write, that their plays will be mounted in favourable circumstances. This is an extremely useful and important thing, which you haven't got in London at all," Yet this year's festival had inspired some misgivings that too much was being attempted. Young felt the most strongly on this. "You have 18 productions this year, which to my way of thinking is far too much. Now we don't get 18 good new plays in the 35 theatres in London in a season, or anything like it. If we've had 12 good new plays this year, that's an optimistic count." He wasn't happy about the three-day programme at the Gate and the Abbey. "I don't know if it means that you couldn't fill the theatre for six days, but what it does mean is there is so much opening. It seems to me you're not going to have enough time for preparation and rehearsal to get a really tip-top production." One comparison led eventually to another and inevitably the talk turned to Edinburgh. Young had a very interesting point to make here: "It's very interesting to compare the two (Dublin and Edinburgh) because the Edinburgh Festival this year consisted entirely of touring productions," This, as Kauffman admitted, was one of the reasons why he hadn't been to Edinburgh for five years. "Whatever

is good there I'll eventually get to see, just by sitting still. Whereas here I'd miss it," He went on to say that while as an American he was happy and proud to see an American company playing at the Gate, this wasn't what he had come to Ireland to see. Young also seemed anxious to see work by Irish writers and Shorter pointed out: "A bad Dublin play doesn't seem as intolerable as a bad London comedy. Mainly because it belongs to where it came from. It's got some connection or roots in Dublin or Ireland and there's a certain interest in tracing them," While Dublin audiences should, of course, be given the opportunity to see overseas productions, as well as indigenous products, Young, in particular, felt that the two kinds of work should be kept separate. The critics all seemed to feel that Irish playwrights are at their best when young, and as Young pointed out, it seemed a pity that at present there was no avant garde theatre flourishing in Dublin. Inevitably the talk turned to the Abbey. Characteristically, perhaps, Kauffman claimed to have sensed a real revival there this year, singling out The Dandy Dolly and Swift for special mention. Shorter, however, could not agree: "I haven't been hopefully to the Abbey for 10 years. The standards of the Abbey seem to me to be as low as they've ever been. . ..... " All in all the feeling seemed to be that so far this year's festival had not produced anything remarkably exciting, though there was praise for Roc Brynner's Opium, and James Douglas's A Tale after School. As Young said: "It was an absolutely typical short story-it could have been written by James Joyce, although I dare say he would have written it in a more polished way." We were left with the impression that while all three critics regarded the Festival as something unique and tremendously worth while, this was for reasons which would strike very few native Dubliners. It was not as a tourist attraction, as a place to see lavish imported productions or even as somewhere to watch the accepted Irish classics; instead the festival seems to justify itself in their eyes as providing a platform on which the occasional piece of inspiration might alight. And, above all, as a concentrated period of living theatrical activity.

After Easter Paisleytravelled to Rome again to protest against the visit of the Archbishop of Canterbury to Pope Paul. He was not allowed enter Rome and was sent back to London Airport where he was kept in custody for 24 hours. On his return to Belfast he claimed that the British were sympathetic to his cause and that "Rome had burnt Cranmer, but had embraced Ramsey. Ramsey had sold out on the Reformation, the Articles of Faith, and the British Constitution." In June he announced his intention to march for the fourth time in succession on the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church to protest its Romeward trend. On June 6th he marched to the General Assembly by way of Cromac Square. The marchers led by Paisley were attacked on reaching Cromac Square, but they quickly passed through the area leaving the RU.C. and the local residents fighting bitterly. The riot at Cromac Square lasted for a few hours and caused considerable damage to cars, shops, and to the local Post Office. When he reached the General Assembly the RU.C. had to restrain his followers from attacking Governor and Lady Erskine. Earlier Paisley had bitterly attacked the Governor "for interfering in internal matters" when he had suggested that the naming of a new bridge after Craigavon was provocative. Paisley was charged with unlawful assembly and, on refusing to be bound over to keep the peace for two years, he was sent to prison for three months. Riots outside jail Shortly after he was interned in Crumlin Road jail 2,000 of his followers gathered outside. At midnight on the instigation of certain people, two of whom were charged in due course for inciting a riot, a street battle between the RU.C. and the crowd took place. A very severe riot ensued. Public houses were looted, police armoured wagons were set on fire and Catholic houses in the Shankill area had petrol bombs thrown at them. After that Crurnlin Road jail had to be continuously guarded by rows of police. New overseas contacts The following two years were much less adventurous. Paisley built up contacts with militant Ulster Protestant emigrants in Glasgow, Liverpool, London and Australia. This helped him very much financially.

In January 1967Paisley called a protest march against the Romanising Bishop of Ripon. By this time the Government and the churches knew how powerful Mr. Paisley was and the visit was called off. This pattern of near confrontation continued. Ecumenical meetings at which Father Desmond Wilson was to have spoken were also called off due to Paisley's threats. In 1968 Paisley pursued a vigorous campaign for the Protestant party in the Liverpool municipal elections. He flew to Westminster Abbey to protest when Cardinal Heenan preached there. When picketing within the cloister of the Abbey he was warned by police that he would be arrested if he did not move off. Paisley crossed the road and attracted considerable publicity when an individual hit him with rotten eggs. At the end of November Paisley occupied the centre of Armagh in order to obstruct the Civil Rights march next day. This marked the beginning of a resurgence of Paisleyism in the politics of Northern Ireland. B.B.C.'s Panorama team had their equipment wrecked and an I.T.V. cameraman was severely beaten. At the beginning of January Paisley's followers successfully harassed the People's Democracy march to Derry. The previous night Paisley had held a meeting in the Derry City Hall, A threatening crowd surrounded the meeting place and Paisley and his followershad had to fight their wayout. Paisley commented " I think the blaspheming, cursing, spitting Roman scum were shown up in their true light. Immediately I arrived at the demonstration this crowd of Roman Republicans from the south surrounded us. They threw rotten eggs and tomatoes." At the same time Paisley was sentenced to three months in jail for unlawful assembly in Armagh. Before sentence was pronounced he stormed out of court knocking down a policeman in the process and in the course of his arrest he sustained a cut in the hand. However, he was released almost immediately after his arrest under a general amnesty. Near election victory He immediately plunged into a vigorous election campaign against Lundy O'Neill. The result of this raised Paisley's prestige even higher than before. He almost defeated Captain O'Neill and many believed that if the election campaign had been slightly longer he would have won. The tragic events of Summer leave Paisley as the most respected person among a considerable section of the Protestant population. It has been a long difficultjourney to political success.

Since he began to preach a mixture of political reaction and fundamentalist theology over twenty years ago he has constantly attacked liberal Unionists and churchmen whether it was popular to do so or not. Now he is reaping the fruits of all his endeavour and so is the North.

LAST APRIL a public opinion poll was carried out in this country, surveying political attitudes on the eve of the election. The poll was undertaken by Social Surveys (Gallup Poll), based on a sample of over 2,000 respondents throughout the country. Within the usual limits of sampling error this poll gives a reliable and unique insight into Irish political attitudes. The range of information provided is immense and in this article only some aspects of the results can be considered. The main conclusions of the survey dealt with in this article are In April 1969, the Labour Party commanded 21 % of the vote. Between then and the General Election in June its vote dropped to 1T~%. The whole swing away from Labour during the campaign, occurred outside Dublin, where its vote slumped by almost a quarter. Fianna Fail was the main beneficiary. No less than 12% of Dublin Fianna Fail voters in the 1965 Election and 10% of Dublin Fine Gael voters had decided to vote Labour before the campaign began, and they were not deflected from this during the election. In the rest of the country there was a larger than normal swing away from Labour, which seems to have lost 7% of its voters to Fianna Fail and 8!% to Fine Gael during this four-year period. Fine Gael's share of the vote is very much higher (30-40%) for the over 55 age groups, than for younger groups. Fianna Fail's share of the Dublin vote is low in the 25-34 age group (only 32%) and high in the 55-64 age groups (51 %). Outside of Dublin Fianna Fail's share of the vote is much the same over the range 25-54, but is significantly higher (60%) above age 55. In Dublin almost half of those under 35 intended to vote Labour-twice as high a proportion as in the case of over 55. Outside Dublin the ratio of intending Labour voters was almost three times as high in the younger as in the older age groups. Fianna Fail has the most uniform pattern of class support-ranging of the small farmers with under 30 acres. from 42% of the upper middle-class to 65%

Fine Gael averages as very much a middle-class party with 43% of the upper middle-class support and 53!% of the larger farmers' support. It is weakest of all amongst unskilled and semi-skilled workers and pensioners, where it has the support ofless than one-fifth. Labour has one-third of the manual workers' vote compared with 15% of the upper middle-class and 20% of the lower middle-class. Only 6% of small farmers and 2% of farmers with more than 30 acres intended to vote Labour. Only 19% of Fianna Fail voters own 30 acres or more-whereas 39% of Fine Gael supporters are in this category. Almost 40% of Labour supporters are council tenants-but only 18% of Fianna Fail supporters and 14% of Fine Gael supporters are in this position. Over half of Labour voters are trade unionists-whereas one-sixth of Fine Gael voters hold union cards. less than a quarter of Fianna Fail voters and less than

In view of the surprise result of the June General Election, it is of particular interest to try to see what light this survey can throw upon this election result. How did the actual results of this election compare with what was indicated by this poll, and just what shifts in opinion were responsible for any change in political allegiances during this period of the election campaign ? Considerable light is thrown on this matter by the data summarised in Table 2. If this information on intended switches in voting is used in conjunction with the 1965actual voting pattern, making due allowance for the deaths of 1965 voters during the following four years, and for the stated voting intentions of those who had not voted in 1965, a clear picture of voting intentions in April 1969emerges. This can then usefully be compared with the actual voting in the June election. A comparison of the voting record of the respondents with the actual 1965 General Election results shows that while the sample was fully representative of the different parts of the country and of the different age groups, it contained too Iowa proportion of people who voted Fine Gael in 1965. Thus whereas in the General Election of that year over 34% of voters gave their first preference to a Fine Gael candidate, only 281% of the sample had voted Fine Gael in that election. Moreover, this underrepresentation of Fine Gael voters applies both to the survey results for Dublin and to those for the rest of the country-although in Dublin it is Labour voters who are correspondingly over-represented whereas in rural areas the over-representation affects Fianna Fail voters. This bias in the sample should be borne in mind in interpreting the poll findings with regard to the electorate's voting intentions last April, which are set out in Table 1.

The poll also revealed how those who had voted for each party in 1965would vote if there were a General Election next day. Table 2 shows the extent to which a significant minority of supporters of each party were prepared to shift their allegiance.

I - Changes in Party Support between 1965 and 1969 Elections

Table 3 suggests that over twothirds of the progress which Labour had made in securing public support between April 1965 and April 1969, principally at the expense of Fianna Fail, was lost during the election campaign. Thus whereas the Labour party might have secured 21 % of the vote in April 1969-an increase of well over a quarter by comparison with four years earlier-it actually increased its share from 16% to only 17t%. It would also appear that while Fianna Fail was the principal beneficiary of this last-minute swing away from Labour, Fine Gael also benefited substantially.

half the ground it had lost to Labour in the capital during the previous four years. By contrast, outside Dublin Labour support appears to have slumped by almost a quarter during the campaign, the great bulk of this swing benefiting Fianna Fail, although Fine Gael may also have marginally improved its position which outside Dublin had remained unchanged over the previous four years.

Changes in allegiance-due to swings in established voters or new generation ?

The upper part of the table also tells us a good deal about the extent to which changes in political allegiances between April 1965 and April 1969 were due to actual swings of support amongst established voters, as distinct from the emergence of a new generation with a different voting pattern. It should be said that a small swing in the political allegiances of supporters of all parties is normal between elections. The survey figures suggest that in both Dublin and in the rest ofIreland at least 10% of the supporters of each party swung away from it, in roughly equal numbers to each of the other two parties, with two exceptions, both of which affect Labour. In Dublin the swing from both Fianna Fail and Fine Gael to Labour between April 1965 and April 1969 was

at least twice as large as the "normal" figure of 5%, and as has been stated earlier this additional support seems to have remained with Labour in Dublin during the campaign. It would seem that no less than 12% of Dublin Fianna Fail voters in the 1965 Election, and 10% of the Dublin Fine Gael voters, had decided to vote Labour before the campaign began, and they were not deflected from this during the election. On the other hand in the rest of the country there was a larger than normal swing away from Labour-which seems to have lost 7% of its voters to Fianna Fail and 8~% to Fine Gael during this four-year period.

Increase in Labour vote-why?

The somewhat higher percentage swing away from than towards Labour outside Dublin between the 1965 Election and the survey did not, however, prevent it from gaining ground substantially in terms of votes, for two reasons. First of all the relatively small size of the total Labour vote meant that even somewhat bigger percentage swings away from that party cost it much less than it gained from somewhat smaller percentage swings in its favour at the expense of the larger parties, which between them had five times as many votes as Labour. Secondly outside Dublin as well as in the capital, Labour secured a disproportionate share

Last minute swings

Of particular interest is the different pattern of last-minute swings in Dublin and in the rest of the country as indicated by this table. The whole of the swing away from Labour seems to have occurred outside Dublin. In Dublin Fianna Fail continued to lose ground during the campaign-a fact which helped to mislead Dublin-based observers and commentators into thinking that they would be defeated nationally. It would seem, however, that most of the continuing swing away from Fianna Fail in Dublin during the campaign went to Fine Gael, which seems to have recovered from Fianna Fail more than

of the support of those who had not voted in 1965, about half of whom did not have a vote at that time, principally because of their age. Labour's advantage in respect of this group of new voters was enjoyed largely at Fianna Fail's expense outside Dublin and at Fine Gael's expense in the city. II-Age and Party Allegiance The survey figures for voting intentions by age, set out in Table 4, are of great importance for the future of the three parties. The figures for the youngest age group, 21-24, are, however, open to some doubt, becauseof the small size of this group, and consequently of the sample upon which the results are based. The voting pattern shown for this age group is, moreover, somewhat out of line with the general trend, as it shows Fianna Fail with a one-third bigger share of the votes of this group than of the next age group, 25-34, and shows Fine Gael with only 12% of the votes of this younger group. A differenceof only nine respondents as between Fianna Fail and Fine Gael would have been sufficient to have "normalised" this pattern, so it seems wise not to attach too much importance to these figures. Consistent Picture For the rest, however, the picture is internally consistent-and very striking. Both in Dublin and elsewhere Fine Gael's share of the vote is very much higher (30-40%), for the over-55 age groups, than for younger groups. Fianna Fail's share of the Dublin vote is low in the 25-34 age group (only 32%), and high in the 55-64 group, (51%). Outside Dublin Fianna Fail's share of the vote is much the same over the range 25-54, but is significantly higher above age 55. Indeed it has almost 60% of the votes of this higher age group outside Dublin. Labour on the other hand enjoys a far higher share of the votes of younger people both in Dublin and in the country, although at all age levels their support is much higher in the capital than elsewhere. In Dublin almost half the under 35's intended to vote Labour at this election-twice as high a proportion as in the case of the over 55'swhile outside Dublin the ratio of intending Labour voters was almost three times as high in the younger as in the older age groups.

III-Class and Party Allegiance As might have been expected the survey shows a distinct correlation between social class and political allegiance. As will be seen from Table 5 Fianna Fail has the most uniform pattern of class support-ranging from 42% of the upper middle class to 65% of the smaller farmers with under 30 acres. It is also relatively strong in the lower middle class group. Fine Gael shares almost equally with Fianna Fail the support of the upper middle class, but is strongest amongst farmers with over 30 acres, well over half of whom intended to vote Fine Gael in this election. It is weakestof all amongst unskilled and semi-skilled workers and pensioners, where it has the support of less than one-fifth. Labour's support, not surprisingly comesprincipally from manual workers, but its votes are drawn from a wider class range than many would, perhaps, suspect. Its one-third of the manual workers' vote compares with 15% of the upper middle class and 20% of the lower middle class. It is weakest

amongst farmers, who clearly fail to identify at all with the Labour party. Only 6% of small farmers and 2% of farmers with more than 30 acres intended to vote Labour. Thus the picture that emerges from these sections of the survey is one of a Labour party challenging from a small and largely urban base, supported by a relatively high proportion of young people, especiallyin Dublin, but losing the election campaign outside Dublin where one-fifth of its support was eroded during the campaign. Fianna Fail most broadly based Party Fianna Fail, the most broadly-based party, lost ground heavily in Dublin both before and during the campaign, but during the election campaign regained enough of its lost support outside the capital to secure a majority of seats, even though with a reduced national vote. Its considerable dependence on an elderly vote especially outside Dublin suggests that it may not

trade union card would, of course, be very much higher. But this ratio is almost twice as high in the case of Labour voters, over half of whom are trade unionists, whereas less than a quarter of Fianna Fail voters and less than one-sixth of Fine Gael voters hold union cards. Of trade unionists who stated their voting intentions during this survey, 42t% intended to vote Fianna Fail, 40t% Labour and only 17% Fine Gael. In Dublin more trade unionists intended to vote Labour than Fianna Fail, but outside Dublin only 38% of trade unionists intended to vote Labour as against 45% for Fianna Fail, and 17% for Fine Gael. Conclusion These "profiles" of Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and Labour voters give us a useful picture of the sources from which each of these three parties draw their support. They suggest that whatever setback Labour may have suffered in the recent General Election, it will increasingly be a force to reckon with in the years ahead. It emerges from this survey as a party challenging from a small base, but supported by a relatively high proportion of young people, especially in Dublin. It lost the election campaign outside Dublin, where almost a quarter of the support it had built up was eroded during the campaign. On the other hand, Fianna Fail, the most broadlybased party, lost ground in Dublin both before the campaign, (to Labour), and during it, (to Fine Gael), but regained enough support outside the capital to secure for it a majority of seats, even though with a reduced overall vote. Its considerable dependence upon an elderly vote, especially in Dublin, suggests that it may not find it easy to maintain this position in future. Out side Dublin Fine Gael draws its support almost equally from all age groups, and has the support particularly of farmers with over 30 acres. In Dublin it is dependent to a significant degree on older voters, and on support from the upper middle class, and lacks support amongst manual workers. Nevertheless during the election campaign it strengthened its position in the capital at the expense of Fianna Fail, thus gaining enough votes to regain over half of the ground it had lost to Labour in Dublin during the previous four years.

find it easy to maintain this position in future. The differences in class support between the parties are naturally reflected in the average standards of living of their supporters. Thus whereas 25% of Fine Gael supporters have telephones, only 17% of Fianna Fail supporters and 15% of Labour supporters enjoy this service. Labour supporters on the other hand are better equipped with television sets than supporters of the other two parties because so many of them live in cities and towns. Only 17% of Labour supporters are without television-whereas 24% of Fine Gael supporters and 28% of Fianna Fail supporters are in this situation. So far as cars are concerned, 59% of Fine Gael supporters, 46% of Fianna Fail supporters and 37% of Labour supporters are members of households with cars. Land-owners A majority of the supporters of each of the two main parties are members of households owning land-62% of Fine Gael supporters, and 52% of Fianna Fail supporters. Only 21% of Labour supporters are in this category, and the great majority of them own less than an acre. There is a very sharp difference between the size of holdings of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail supporters. Only 19% of Fianna Fail supporters own
84

30 acres or more-whereas 39% of Fine Gael supporters are in this category House-ownership There is little difference between supporters of the two parties so far as house ownership is concerned. About three-quarters of the supporters of both parties own houses, or are buying them through a mortgage, whereas only half of Labour supporters are in this position. By contrast almost 40% of Labour supporters are council tenants, but only 18% of Fianna Fail supporters and 14% of Fine Gael supporters are in this position. Labour supporters also have a different educational pattern. Over half completed their education by age 14, and only 13% remained at school till 17. On the other hand less than half of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail supporters left school at or before 14, and 21% of Fianna Fail supporters and 28% of Fine Gael supporters remained until 17 or later. Full-time Employees Again while only a quarter of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail supporters are full-time employees, a half of Labour supporters are in this position. Finally the parties differ markedly in their shares of trade union membership. Just 27% of all voters hold trade union cards-although the proportion belonging to families whose head holds a