irresistible. The organised labour discontent in Ireland, in Dublin, was
not considerable enough to impose its aims or its colours on the
Volunteers, and it is the labour ideal which merges and disappears in
the national one. The reputation of all the leaders of the insurrection,
not excepting Connolly, is that they were intensely patriotic Irishmen,
and also, but this time with the exception of Connolly, that they were
not particularly interested in the problems of labour.

The great strike of two years ago remained undoubtedly as a bitter and
lasting memory with Dublin labour--perhaps, even, it was not so much a
memory as a hatred. Still, it was not hatred of England which was evoked
at that time, nor can the stress of their conflict be traced to an
English source. It was hatred of local traders, and, particularly,
hatred of the local police, and the local powers and tribunals, which
were arrayed against them.

One can without trouble discover reasons why they should go on strike
again, but by no reasoning can I understand why they should go into
rebellion against England, unless it was that they were patriots first
and trade unionists a very long way afterwards.

I do not believe that this combination of the ideal and the practical
was consummated in the Dublin insurrection, but I do believe that the
first step towards the formation of such a party has now been taken,
and that if, years hence, there should be further trouble in Ireland
such trouble will not be so easily dealt with as this one has been.

It may be that further trouble will not arise, for the co-operative
movement, which is growing slowly but steadily in Ireland, may arrange
our economic question, and, incidentally, our national question