Madam, - You carried a letter from Peter Fellows-McCully (February 9th) asking that any honouring of the men of 1916 be free of military character. I would like to add my voice to this request.
The use of arms at that time represented the only action that appeared to have a possibility of success for their particular objective, and in no way constituted the founding of a permanent army.
Furthermore, the attempted annexing of the mantle of those men by the present Army is out of place, irrespective of the personal qualities of its members, considering the different circumstances in taking their fatal decision to rebel against the "legal authorities", a function outside the scope of a standing army.
What about the normal man or woman in the street, who feels that they would like to show their sense of solidarity with the dead, and their gratitude and respect for them? Their place is hijacked by the Department of Defence. Even the graves at Arbour Hill are controlled by the Department, which also runs the annual service of remembrance. Invitations to this, and rare other occasions, are sent to those close relatives of the dead who are willing to accept the militarisation of our common heritage; not to others.
I would appeal to the powers that be that the commemoration of the 1916 leaders (and all others who should be remembered) be given back to the people they fought for, and that this should be done by removing the influence of the Department of Defence and giving the function to the Department of the Taoiseach, for instance.
I do not have any great expectations that I will be listened to. A measure of the success of our cultural development since the Rising can be found in the fact that Government letters and circulars are sent to me as "Ms Seóirse Ó Pluingcéid", despite the obvious masculinity of my legal name. - Yours, etc,
SEÓIRSE PLUNKETT, Marlborough Road, Dublin 4.
Madam, - I must commend you for the excellence of the recent debate on your Letters page - spoiled only by the usual sniping from the top right-hand corner.
One significant point missed by your contributors to this debate - and all your previous debates on the 1916 topic - is the unconstitutional nature of the British government and cabinet in 1916.
Fresh elections were due by 1916 - but were called off on account of the war. Instead, the prime minister was ousted by a cabal of Unionist ministers and Home Rule was dead - Redmond's sacrifice had been for nothing.
I am puzzled as to why so many of your well-read contributors missed this obvious point. - Yours, etc,
CADOGAN ENRIGHT, Ballymastore, Co Fingal.