Puslapio vaizdai

island. But he will never subjugate Ireland. And in this struggle for self-determination the Irish can at all times count upon the sympathy of the whole German people."

'Dr George Chatterton-Hill, as the only Irishman present, thanked the company for their warm-hearted interest in the Irish question. . . . He stated that Ireland was on the eve of great events. The reason of all this was summarised in the two words "Sinn Fein," that great political, econòmic, and cultural movement which recognised England as the evil genius of Ireland, and which thwarted and combated her in every direction. The movement therefore raised the cry "Separation from England!" and demanded Ireland for the Irish. From the moral point of view Ireland was the best contradiction of England's hypocritical boast that she was fighting for the freedom of the smaller nations.

'An address upon Germany and the Irish question by Kommerzienrat Dr Karl Goldschmidt concluded the proceedings. (Berliner Tageblatt,' March 18, 1918.)

A report of this meeting was sent out by German. Wireless on March 18, concluding with the words, 'The freedom of the seas would only be assured when a free Ireland is made the Watcher of the Atlantic Ocean.'

[ocr errors]

The Stockholm Bureau of the Amis de la Liberté irlandaise' handed to the Ministers of the Powers there a statement of the present position in Ireland, and the claim of Ireland to equal freedom with Serbia and Belgium. The document was signed for the Bureau by Mr St John Gaffney, formerly Consul-General of the United States, and Dr Chatterton-Hill, Professor, Geneva University. (Nationality,' March 23, 1918.)


'Speaking at a largely-attended meeting in Foxford (Co. Mayo) on Sunday, Citizen Arthur Griffith, referring to the meeting of the German-Irish Society at Berlin on St Patrick's Day, said it followed the presentation of a claim at Stockholm to the same treatmeut for Ireland as would be accorded to Poland. Copies of the claim were accepted by all the neutral and Central Powers. The gathering at Berlin was officially visited by the German Government; and the representatives of the German Government declared that they would support Ireland's claims at the Peace Conference. It was because she feared they were going to that court that

England wanted to set up bogus Home Rule. Dealing with the renewed demand for conscription, Mr Griffith said: "We tell England that she will never enforce conscription on Ireland." ("The Irishman,' April 6, 1918.)

The Government statement tells how in April 1918, shortly after Von Stumm, the representative of the German Foreign Office, told his hearers that the Irish could count at all times upon the sympathy of Germany, it was ascertained that a plan had been formed by Germany to land arms and munitions again in Ireland; and they only awaited definite information as to the time and place and date. On April 12 a German emissary -Dowling, alias O'Brien-one of the few Irish soldiers who had been corrupted from his allegiance by Casement when a prisoner of war, landed in a collapsible boat from a German submarine on Crabbe Island, off the coast of Clare. The Germans had been plotting with Sinn Fein for a new rising, to accompany their great offensive in France, and to be assisted by the landing of arms and munitions from submarines on the Irish coast. In May of the present year arms for Ireland were shipped at Cuxhaven in submarines; and the plots and plans for another rebellion were actively maturing in Ireland and Germany in the hopes of a decisive German victory in the great offensive.*

In the face of these perils to Ireland, England, the Empire and the world's liberties, the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, on April 18, 1918, proclaimed that the Conscription of Ireland is

'an oppressive and inhuman law which the Irish people have a right to resist by all the means that are consonant with the law of God'-and directed their clergy' to celebrate a public Mass of Intercession in every Church in Ireland to avert the scourge of conscription with which Ireland is now threatened.'

While the Bishops in Maynooth were thus urging their servile and superstitious flocks to resist the law of the land, and to combine in protesting against 'the naked militarism' of the Prime Minister of England, Messrs Dillon, Devlin, Healy, William O'Brien, and the representatives of the Irish Trade Unions, gathered in

* See evidence at the Court-Martial on Dowling, Times,' July 9, 1918.

Dublin, under the presidency of the Lord Mayor, and, in concert with the Bishops at Maynooth, resolved to resist the 'Declaration of War on the Irish Nation by the House of Commons in passing the Conscription Bill.'

The following is a specimen of the appeals which have been spread broadcast in Ireland-in this case an appeal to women-and are supported by the Roman Catholic hierarchy and the Nationalist leaders. This appeal was circulated widely at church and chapel doors.


'IRISHWOMEN! Your Country is threatened with a calamity more deadly and appalling than anything that has confronted it since the days of Cromwell. England in her malignant hate of our small nationality has declared a war of extermination upon the last remnant of the Irish race which has survived her brutal rule of famine and persecution. England declares war upon You by her decision to seize by force the bodies of Your Men-those nearest and dearest to you-and compel them against conscience and national honour to wear the shameful livery of their country's implacable enemy-to become helots in body and soul!

'Irishwomen! Take your stand with Ireland. You must realise your power and use it, whatever be the cost. There must be no blacklegs amongst you base enough to help the British Government in their dirty work. There must be no question of women filling men's places, or taking any part, active or passive, in this crime against the Irish Nation.

'Women must resolve to sacrifice everything in their efforts to oppose, thwart and render impossible the murderous attempt on the life and honour of Ireland. CONSCRIPTION FOR IRELAND MEANS ETERNAL SLAVERY FOR OUR COUNTRY. Irishwomen! You must choose Death itself, rather than suffer this National Disgrace! The Time to make Your Choice is Now!'

But at this same time the ceaseless watch of the British Navy was saving Ireland, her priests, politicians and people, from the 'naked militarism' of Germany, and from a German invasion plotted by Sinn Fein.



THE flagging of the German offensive, which became noticeable on March 31, continued during the first few days of April; the enemy confining themselves to local attacks, which were for the most part unsuccessful, while the Allied forces made progress in several localities. The village of Ayette, which had been lost on March 29, was recaptured by our troops on April 3; and enterprises in the Hebuterne sector resulted in the improvement of our positions, with the capture of some 300 prisoners. The combined French and British forces also gained ground between Moreuil and the Somme. The great German offensive south of Arras in fact came to an end with the month of March, the operations of the succeeding days on this portion of the front marking a period of transition to a new scheme, which was about to unfold itself further north, and being partly designed, no doubt, to keep alive the anxiety which the Allies naturally felt for the safety of Amiens.

On April 4 the Germans resumed the offensive with large forces between Montdidier and the Somme. Our troops were obliged to evacuate Hamel; Mailly and Morisel fell to the enemy's assaults; and the Grivesnes sector was heavily attacked, but the French maintained their positions in this quarter. On the following morning the Germans, while continuing their pressure south of the Somme, threw ten divisions against our positions between Albert and Bucquoi, but without gaining any important success in either region. On April 6 the right wing of von Boehm's army began a new offensive on the south bank of the Oise, which, in the course of three days' intermittent fighting, obliged the French to withdraw behind the Ailette. The Germans contented themselves with the possession of the right bank of the river from Chauny to Landricourt; and the general situation between Arras and the Aisne remained practically unchanged till May 27, though occasional engagements of some severity were fought in several localities, principally on the front between the Somme and the Avre.

It is now known that, as was conjectured in the article which appeared in the April number of the 'Quarterly Review,' the object of the enemy, in the first

phase of the offensive, was to gain possession of the railways which cross the Somme estuary at Amiens and Abbeville, with the view of attacking subsequently the smaller group of Allied armies north of the river, which would have been isolated by the loss of these lateral communications. This object they had partially attained by intercepting the double-track railway from Montdidier to Arras, and by bringing under long-range artillery fire the other lines which cross the river immediately above and below Amiens. Their plan was, however, very far from completion. Their abandonment of the enterprise may fairly be attributed to the staunch resistance of the Allied armies on both flanks, towards Arras and Montdidier, which frustrated their design for the envelopment of Amiens. To persist in the endeavour would probably have entailed greater sacrifices than the Germans were in a position to incur.

It may, in fact, be surmised that they had miscalculated, at the outset, the strength and time necessary for the completion of the first phase of the operations; and that they had to choose between relinquishing the attack on Amiens and dislocating their arrangements for the second phase (the offensive against the northern group of armies) by withdrawing a great portion of the force assembled for its execution in order to reinforce the armies on the Amiens front. In choosing the former alternative they no doubt acted wisely. The Allies had gained time to concentrate large forces on the front south of Arras, and to strengthen their positions. The attack might fail; or, if successful, it might involve an expenditure of force which would so weaken the German armies as to necessitate a revision of the whole plan of campaign. It seemed, therefore, preferable to strike in a fresh locality, trusting to the effect of surprise, to the partial interruption of the Allied communications, which would delay the lateral movement of reserves, and to the probable reluctance of the Allies to withdraw troops from the Amiens front, where the situation was critical, to meet a blow which might prove to be only a diversion. In this connexion it may be observed that, if any significance is to be attached to the reports of press correspondents, there was a natural tendency at the Allied headquarters to doubt the seriousness of each

« AnkstesnisTęsti »