FROM THE ARCHIVES:The "utility" of teaching Irish was an issue long before it became compulsory, as this letter from the poet and writer T. W. Rolleston indicates. – JOE JOYCE
SIR, – I notice that in your report of the proceedings of yesterday’s [Church of Ireland] Synod the Rev. E. Hobson trots out the many-times exploded “utility” argument against Irish.
I do not propose to deal with the principle of the “utility” argument here. We have got beyond that stage of the question, and statesmen and educationalists have made up their minds upon it in a contrary sense to Mr. Hobson. But I should like to direct his attention to an utterance of the Bishop of Killaloe, which is very pertinent to the subject.
Speaking on the same resolution as that with which Mr. Hobson dealt, his lordship said: A great part of the falling off in the populations of Ireland was due to the fact that young men and women of their Church who were badly educated had gone elsewhere to seek for more remunerative employment . . .
Now, how does the “utility” argument look in the face of the fact that the Christian Brothers, by far the most progressive and efficient body of educationalists in Ireland, are also the most energetic promoters of Gaelic instruction, and wherever it is possible to do so, make it an obligatory subject for every pupil in their many schools?
Do the visible results look as if these pupils had wasted their time and “handicapped” themselves in learning Irish?
I may describe an incident of a couple of years ago which should serve to reinforce the view that we would be better occupied in studying the methods and principles of our competitors than in ignorantly decrying them.
An examination was to be held for boy assistants in the public libraries in Dublin. Notices of the vacancies were sent to the principal Protestant and Roman Catholic schools, and they were invited to send up their brightest lads for examination . . . When the results were ascertained it was found that every one of the five appointments had fallen to a pupil of the Christian Brothers. My informant was the examiner.
I can assure Mr. Hobson, and those who think with him, that the Gaelic movement in Ireland is not a passing fad or piece of airy sentimentalism. It is only at the beginning of its work as yet, and already it has become a social and intellectual force of profound importance in Irish life.
It promises to have a marked influence on economic developments as well. The fact is that it vivifies whatever it touches.
The attitude of the Church of Ireland towards this movement ought to be a matter of very serious concern to Churchmen at present, and they ought not to allow it to be supposed that that attitude is represented by the remarks of Mr. Hobson, remarks to which I have drawn attention merely because they are a type of a certain class of comment of which we hear a great deal too much from members of the Communion to which Mr. Hobson and myself belong.
– Yours, c.,
T. W. Rolleston
101 Pembroke Road, Dublin.