Main content

Title: McMahon Glynn, Patrick to Glynn, James P., 1890
CollectionPatrick McMahon Glynn_Letters to his family (1874-1927) [Gerald Glynn O'Collins]
SenderMcMahon Glynn, Patrick
Sender Gendermale
Sender Occupationlawyer
Sender Religionunknown
OriginAdelaide, South Australia, Australia
DestinationGort, Co. Galway, Ireland
RecipientGlynn, James P.
Recipient Gendermale
Doc. No.
Partial Date
Doc. Type
Word Count781
Genreelections, money, politics
April 6th 1890

My dear James
With a very bad cold, and certain fagged out feeling induced by scribbling a leading article, I am only in a condition for a few hurried
lines. Let me in the first place explain the delay in replying to your
last, by saying that I am in the midst of a general election. This is
not light matter in my district, as the population is about half German
who follow their mis-leaders in the politics of the pocket, rather than
the suggestions of what is due to an approved career. Against me
are, 1st misrepresentation in private of unscrupulous opponents, 2nd
difference of intellectual levels, 3rd sectarian bigotries aroused by a
suggested and inadequate grant to private schools, and 4thly consistency,
which precludes one from shaping speeches to local likings.
However, I think I will get in. If not, as I am in the last batch, other
districts would return me willingly—but the matter cannot be helped
now. I refused the Attorney Generalship a fortnight ago.
If I cannot act on my wish and send you cash now, it is
because my all is in stocks at present down, owing to financial
collapse in Victoria, and that I cannot know how the elections will
touch my credit. Later on, I may be in a position. But, as some of
your hints in regard to Tullow seem to imply that I have a capacity
for charity which is not exercised, I must tell you that unless some
one doubles my income I can stand no more drains than are made
on my pocket. I do send cash there now and then—but really there
is an aunt in Melbourne who is occasionally and successfully exigent,
calls from Sydney that can't be answered, and political benevolences
without end. The sphere of my benevolence is rather wide, I can tell
you, on this side of the world. I don't mind, but must be just to
myself, or rather my reputation when the guage [sic] seems out.
Now, as to Ireland, I am sorry I have not your letter with me,
but I think you spoke about no one but idiots living out of the
country supporting Home Rule. Well, I am a veteran in intensified
experience now, so can, without doing injustice to critics, take a
wide view of issues. You surely don't imagine that my intellectual
food is the Dublin Freeman's Journal, or, for that matter, the Daily
Express. I subscribe to the Times, strange to say, and my weekly is
the Spectator. Stranger still, I regard Davitt and Archbishop Wallsh
as the only men who grasp the true solution to the Irish difficulty.
Again, I wish that the necessity for Home Rule had never arisen, and
for reasons very different than the mental poverty of most unionists
ever suggests; but that it has arisen, a good many wise and balanced heads believe. To my mind, the only man that ever properly stated
the true difficulties of Home Rule is Dicey, in his republished
Spectator articles. But for the ephemeral warfare & issues of Messrs.
Balfour and Parnell, I care scarcely a fig.
As to Ashbourne Acts1, have you ever read the statistics of
peasant proprietorship in France? The Times has often unintentionally
pointed [out] their Moral, and the best commentary on the
Ashbourne Acts is the Times recent article on them. They show that
the gombeen men [— money-lenders] inevitably come to the front.
But, of course, for politicians whose national future is the length of a
Parliament, the Ashbourne Acts are perfect.
I am afraid, James, you allow the limited view, or local bias,
which you implicitly condemn in Dublin & Co, to influence what
otherwise would be an urbane temper. At all events you must
remember that I am a man of action—that is my fate—and that
compromise is the basis of politics. If Home Rule is inevitable, it is
merely as a balance between evils. I would be a unionist, after
Dicey's not Balfour's fashion, if the conditions allowed. But I am
still afraid they don't.
Well, let politics go to the dogs, and let me enquire about yourself.
I hope your book is a success. What about Eugene? If luck
turns again, you will hear from me soon, and never think I would
regard anything as a loan which you would not. I wonder would it
be well for you to come out here? If the amenities of life arc
against you at home, think about it. Give my love to all, and write
soon to
Your affectionate brother
P. McM. Glynn

J. P. Glynn Esq.
Boyle Ireland.