Volume II. Guth na Bliadhna ' leabhar II.]

be encouraged to the extent only of making it an occasional and limited medium for the teach-[ing of English to Gaelic-speaking children, and after [that—the deluge, so far as Gaelic is concerned, krhis sort of attitude is all very well in Anglicised Scotland; but in Ireland the occupier of a Celtic. [Chair who should presume to indulge in such pre-Iposterous language would be promptly, and de­servedly, "howled down". Verily, we are yet lamentably timid.

We are ignorant when we refuse or neglect to profit by the lessons of history, and when we sub­ordinate ourselves and our interests to foreign influ­ences. The Gaelic cause stands in no need of apology; nay more, we hold that he who conde­scends to argue the point with such as oppose us is guilty of a species of insult to nation and lan­guage. If we were better informed, we should bo less subservient—less timid; but it is because we are ignorant—because our people do not know as pey should do the proud and splendid past that-lies behind us—that we are so ridiculously timid. ■The Gaelic cause stands in no need of apology, fit is above it. If we were really worthy of it— Ireally worthy descendants of the men from whom we are descended—we should recognise this and act on it. But we do not so recognise ; we do not. so act. So we are yet absurdly timid, and child­ishly, fantastically, superstitiously ignorant.

There is one thing more in conclusion of these; heads. If the movement is to make better progress in the future than it has done in the past more-pttention must be paid to the purely commercial [side of the question. In Ireland the literary and Ithe commercial movement go hand in hand; they are there rightly regarded as inseparable. A peopli does not live by literature alone: neither does it^ live by bread and butter alone; but the two things] -combined are necessary to the civilised state. In Alba we have plenty of people talking about lan_: guage and literature; but comparatively few who] concern themselves with the bread and butten which is necessary to support them. The grievance] tof Alba is, primarily and fundamentally, largely ain -economic one ; and if we would make the national! cause not only attractive but essential to the great] mass of our countrymen, we must embrace all avail-] •able means to improve their social condition! Two hundred years of distress and stagnation are not a bad capital to start a comprehensive national cama paign on. For our parts, we are quite willing and] ^prepared to embark on the speculation.

focailin

Is fada an la o bhi Gaedhil na hEireann agul Gaedhil na hAlban fa aon ri amhain.

Do scaradar o cheile aimsir an Righ Aedh] Mac Aenmire ins an mbliadhain 574 a.d. agua bhi "Home Rule" agus a righthe fein os cionn] Albanach as sion i leith.

Is docha go bhfuil eolas ar an meid sin ag gach aon Albanach indiu.

Gidh nach rabhadar fa churam an ri ceadhna o aimsir Aedha mhic Aenmire ar a shoin sin nior fhag sin na go raibh caradas eatortha go cearna mile bliadhan 'na dhiadh sin agus ba mhinic do •chabhradar le cheile.

Bhi dream calma de Ghaedhealaibh na hAlban -ar chluain Tairbh i nEirinn ins an mbliadhain 10l3 ag eabhra le Brian Boirmhe i gcoinnibh Lochlan­nach, agus bhi dream laidir de Ghaedhalibh na hEireann ar Blàr-allt a' Bhonnaich ag tabhairt con-gnaimh do Riobard Bruis. Feach cad deir an file Sasannach, Chaucer, i dtaoibh na nEireannach la-an chatha mhoir ud :—

" To Scottish ... we ne'er would yield, The Irish bowmen won the field ".

Ba mhor an truagh na'r lean na hEireannaigh agus na hAlbanaigh ar chabhra le cheile riamh o-shoin mar dheanfadh an meid sin moran maitheasa !dhoibh araon.

Thainig na Sasanaigh idir Eire agus Albain agus-cuireadh o na cheile muintear an dha thir. Ta an Sasanach 'ga ndeighilt gus indiu agus ni doich tliomsa go mheidh aon rath ortha araon go dtugaid isiad druim lamha leis an Sasanach soin. Ni leigeanm 'na hAlbanaigh ortha go dtuigid siad an meid sin ach muna ndeinid mar sin ni mheasimse gur feidir le daoine an da thir an sean-chion ceadhna do bheith aca ar a cheile fa mar do bhiodh ins an. aimsir do ghabh tharainn.

'Se mo thuairm gur mhaith leis na hEireannaigh-an tsean-bhaidh agus an tsean-charadas do bheith-aca aris leis na hAlbanaigh, mar nior bhuail aon 'Eireannach Horn ar feadh mo shaoghail 'na go raibh "muinntearas na chroidhe aige do Ghaedhealaibh, Alban.

Deir siad mar seo: " Is d'ar dtreibh fein iad. agus ba mhor againn acheile fado ; ni maith linn amh go bhfuil uraim agus cion chomh mor soin lag an Albanach ar an Sasanach mar da reir sin fchabhrochadh se leis an Sasanach 'nar gcoinnibhne agus ni mar sin do ghnidheadh se ins an tsean-[shaoghal. Nior thugamair aon chuis ghearain do'n Albanach le bheith 'nar gcoinnibh. Mheall an Sas-

anach e, acht beidh failte againn roimhe aris ma thagann se isteach sa Ghedealtacht, agus beidh se 'na bhrathair againn aris le congnamh Dè." Is èl mo thuairm gurab e sin smuaineamh na nEireannl ach agus ni mheasaim go bhfuil aon bhaoghal gel ngeillfidh Eire do Shasana, 'na go mheidh cion aicl uirthe go dtugaidh Sasana a ceart di.

Ba mhaith le hEire cabhair na nAlbanach agus ta suil aici leis an gcabhair sin, acht ma ta se ìl ndan do mhuinntear an da rioghacht caidreamh dol bheith eatortha ar an chuma do bhiodh fado, ntì fhuil aon nidh eile chomh maith leis an gcaradai subhailceach ud do thabhairt ar nais, leis an dteanga] bhinn sin ar sinnsear do labhairt aris, mar is daoinl sinn d'aon treibh agus d'aon chinneadh agus ta se do reir riaghlacha Dè aon teanga umhain do bheith againn.

Conan Maol.
deer forests

It is hard to find any discussion respecting tha vexed question of deer forests conducted in an] impartial and statesmanlike manner. The opa ponents of deer forests, equally with their apolo­gists and supporters, are wont to approach the subject with biased minds, the consequence being that the general public is left in considerably doubt as to the respective merits of the two cases! The man who denounces deer forests wholesale] is just as familiar (and obnoxious) as the person] in whose opinion all forms of "sport" constitute ■a species of selfish and ignoble fetish. Both ex­tremists are in our view equally absurd, though! were we obliged to state a preference, we would! •sympathise rather with the anti-deer-forester than

with the other fellow. After all, those who have themselves been expelled in order to make room ilor deer, or whose forebears were set adrift for the same reason, can scarcely be expected to discuss [this subject without some heat. The old word says : "An cunnart a chaidh seachad, is cùis fhar-maid"; and on much the same principle we who have not suffered, or whose ancestors suffered not, [may be too apt to cry " Hold ! enough !" to those who have been less fortunate in this respect than [ourselves.

Still, our opinion is that the views of a disinter­ested party are more likely to find acceptance with the general public than are those of either of the extremists above-mentioned. The proprietor who seeks to prove that deer forests, so far from being a curse on the land, are a social and economic blessing, is not likely to find his views endorsed I to any great extent, save by the limited class to [which he appeals. On the other hand, the " agi-rtator," as he is termed by the deer-preserving [fraternity, prejudices his case by reason of his [violence. He seeks to prove too much. Deer and deer-forests are not necessarily an evil. It is 'only the abuse of both which constitutes the i scandal, which is true of a great many other things besides that which we are presently discussing.

The truth of the matter, therefore, lies where I the sensible man will naturally expect to find it, I namely, between these two extremes. It is some­thing disagreeable to our vanity to be obliged to confess that the "golden mean," which so many i trifling and commonplace people unite in praising, is, after all, the wise man's portion. It is not too I much to say that contempt for these shallow-pated <sup>:

1</sup> reasoners frequently drives a young man of genius

to regrettable extremes. He hates "moderation'^ because it is preached by so many ridiculous peoples We admit that it is unfortunate that many good] causes cannot be dissociated from the blockheada who subscribe to them, not because they have] arrived at that end by a process of intelligent] thought, but simply by dint of prejudice, breeding! and other circumstances over which they are as] incapable of exercising any control as they are ofj understanding them. This is the penalty, however,! which the wise man must pay, sooner or later, to! the commonplace world in which he moves; and! however much he may despise the company of foolsj and dunces, he will be wiser still if he discovers] sufficient philosophy to put up with them. I

We propose to approach this subject of deer forests entirely from the Gaelic point of view:! As to any other there may be, we earn »1ess|^M than the proverbial two straws whether or not ifc'J be agreeable, or the reverse, to our ownìl It is indeed high time that the Gael of Scotland began! to look at questions which concern him, not froml the point of view of his political pastors and masters J but from the standpoint of his own individuality— of his own race. We shall, accordingly, have our] say on this subject without fear and without^&vour; and we trust that what follows will recommend itself to our countrymen, irrespective of creed and party.

One of the earliest views of our history is that which discovers to us our ancestors as mainly subsisting by hunting; and even when the nomadic state of society passed away, and the primitive tribal system gave place to more settled conditions, we find that hunting formed no small part of the occupation of our ancestors. Ancient Gaelic litera­ture abounds in references, poetic and otherwise, [ to the chase. The exploits of the Fianna of Scotland [and Ireland constitute a moving tale, in which '.hunting and fighting go hand in hand. The same llove of venery, the same keen appreciation of the fchase, in all its forms and aspects, characterises the ■writings of the best of our Gaelic poets. In Moladh .Beinn Dòrain, one of the best known poems in ; the Gaelic language, and justly admired on account rof its many excellencies, we have a beautiful picture I of hunting presented to us by one who was himself I a hunter; and, as a modern critic has justly ob­served, "neach air bith a leughas Moladh Beinn Dòrain gu faicilleach bho thoiseach gu deireadh, faodaidh an neach sin eòlas fhaotainn air na buadhan a bhiod feumail agus freagarach do dheagh shealgair, agus air cumadh a' ghunna 'bha cleachdte ann an I làithean a' bhàird ". Other well-known Gaelic poets have left on record their appreciation of the delights and beauties of the chase. In the works of Rob Donn, Alasdair Mac Mhaighstir Alasdair, Mac Lachlan, etc., will be found abundant evidence of [their author's acquaintance with the habits of deer, and of that intimate knowledge of nature, in her [sterner and wilder aspects, which this noblest of sports is eminently calculated to foster and en­courage.

And here we may well turn aside a moment 'from our main theme in order to make a few I observations touching the ancient method of hunt­ing the deer. In the extensive literature connected with the Fianna of Scotland and Ireland are to be found many particular accounts of the old Gaelic manner of handling the chase. The more common way of hunting the deer and other wild animals ₄ which then abounded in Erin and Alba was in

B

company; that is to say, a particular part of thel country having been selected as likely to affordj good sport, the hunters, to the number sometimesl of several hundreds, would surround the hill or. forest to be beaten; and the dogs being unleashed] the whole company at a given signal would then] move forward, with the object of surrounding thel game. The startled animals would naturally avoid] the hunters and their hounds as far, and as long,¹ as possible ; but in the end, of course, the quarry, by dint of being driven together to one place, inj one confused mass, would fall an easy victim to the] hunters, who either made a general slaughter of the terror-struck and distracted creatures'enclosed] within the human net, as it were, or slew them] singly as by breaking back upon the ever-eontractj ing ring of hunters they endeavoured to effect theig escape. This, according to the ancient sgeulan was] the more common and popular way of managing the chase.

The Silva Gadelica of Mr. Standish O'Grady, and other works, prove to us, however, that thè] chase was also frequently undertaken by single] individuals, or by parties of two or threeJlThus, we see that the " deer drive," and the infinitely morel enjoyable and scientific "stalk," of to-day are] but simple evolutions of the time-honoured practices] of our far-away ancestors. The hunt in company—, the chase as generally managed by Finn Mac Cumhal and his band of heroes—continued to be] popular in Scotland down to a comparatively] recent date. Indeed, the account of a hunting in] the Braes of Mar furnished us by Taylor, the selH styled " Water Poet," who himself was present at] such an undertaking in the year 1618, reads exactly] like one of the many descriptions of such exploits] in which ancient Gaelic literature, more especially that connected with the Fianna, abounds. The aer I count in question has often been quoted; but since jit supplies us with a terse and vivid description of Ithe chase as generally practised by our forefathers, I we make no apology for reproducing it here. " The [ manner of hunting," says Taylor, " is this : Five or

I six hundred men doe rise early in the morning, and [they doe disperse themselves divers wayes, and

I^I seven, eight or ten miles compasse, they do bring
\ or chase in the deer in many heards (two, three, or
I four hundred in a heard) to such or such a place as
Ithe noblemen shall appoint them ; then, when day

is come, the lords and gentlemen of their companies [do ride or go to the said places, sometimes wading-[up to the middles through bournes and rivers, and [then they being come to the place doe lie down on Ithe ground, till those foresaid scouts, which are called the Tinckhell (Gaelic, Timchioll, a circuit, compass) doe bring down the deer; but as the proverb says of a bad cooke, so these Tinckhell rmen doe lick their own fingers; for besides their 1 bowes and arrows which they carry with them, wee Jean heare now and then a harquebuse or a musquet goe off, which doe seldom discharge in vaine; then after we had stayed three hours or thereabouts, we [might perceive the deer appeare on the hills round rabout us (their heads making a show like a wood), which being followed close by the Tinckhell are phased down into the valley where we lay; then all the valley on each side being way-laid with a hundred couple of strong Irish grey-hounds, they ■are let loose as occasion serves upon the hearde of deere, what with dogs, gunnes, arrows, durks and! [daggers, in the space of two hours four score fat deere were slain, which after are disposed of some one way and some another, twenty or thirty miles, and more than enough left for us to make merry withal at our rendevouze."

Let us now proceed to examine the question of deer forests from the Gaelic legal point of view. It has been asserted with more vehemence than knowledge, that the Gaelic people have an in­alienable right to the deer of our glens and forests, which, if it means that any Gael has, or used to have, an inalienable right to kill deer whenever occasion or humour urged him to do so, we have no hesitation whatever in characterising such a belief as absolutely unfounded. Such loose assertions are too frequently in the mouths of those who, meaning well no doubt, yet allow their prejudices to exceed their discretion—to say nothing of their learning. It would say little, indeed, for our boasted Gaelic civilisation if the conditions under which our ancestors lived were so far removed from "law and order" that license of this sort was everywhere tolerated if not explicitly sanctioned and encouraged.

We have observed a similar tendency to ex­aggeration on the part of those who advocate what is called "land nationalisation". With the view that the Gael is the proper and rightful inhabitant of our straths and glens we have, of course, all imaginable sympathy; but we beg leave to state that, contrary to what is often asserted, the social­istic notions underlying many of these revolutionary schemes of land reform derive absolutely no justi­fication from Gaelic law. It is as well that we should be clear on this point; for it will be found, on examination, that certain predatory instincts, for the exercise of which what is loosely described as the "cian system" is frequently erroneously referred to as supplying sufficient justification for the same, have really no justification at all, so far at all events as Gaelic custom and law are con­cerned. Even the " cian system," touching which much glib language is wont to be held, was in rapid process of decay when Gaelic civilisation was at its best; and a code of law which was so search­ing and particular that the very bees were subject to a law of injury and trespass, is hardly likely to have left undefined (and unsafeguarded) the rights of property holders, and, by consequence, the legal status, as it were, of so noble and important an animal as the deer.

The most important existing source of ancient Gaelic criminal law is the compilation known as Leabhar Acaille, the Book of Aicile. This code, or rather digest, says Dr. Hyde, "professes to be a compilation of the dicta and opinions of King Cormac Mac Art, who lived in the third century, and of Cennfaeladh, who lived in the seventh" {Literary Histoid of Ireland, p. 584). Unfortu­nately, like most of the ancient Gaelic law books, it is a digest rather than a code, and contains a number of hypothetical cases, which may, or may not, have actually come under the cognisance of the laws of the land. However, in this book, as in the Seanchus Mòr, and other law tracts, we find the law of tres­pass, and of compensation for trespass, on the part of deer and other animals clearly set forth; and under the heading, "what is lawful in deer judgments," in the first mentioned book we find the expression "the unlawful hunter" constantly used. The learned translators of this interest­ing digest have the following note upon the use of this term. " If the hunter were ' unlawful,' i.e., if the hunting was an illegal act, the amount of dire-fine in each case was fixed in a greater ratio." It is evident, then, that in addition to our ancient Gaelic law providing for compensation to be paid to the person whose crops or other property were damaged by deer, the trespasser in pursuit of game which did not belong to him was considered as " unlawful," and was mulcted accordingly. Not only this, and other entries in our ancient law books, but the whole tenor and spirit of Gaelic jurisprudence seem effectually to dispose of the theory that the Gael had an " inalienable right" to go forth and slaughter deer, and to appropriate the spoils of the chase, whenever his larder needed re­plenishing or his sporting proclivities roused him to action.

We are convinced that it only requires a little thought on the part of the candid and unprejudiced reader to enable him to arrive at the conclusion that this must needs have been so. No doubt, in primitive communities the unwritten law is that what a man finds or acquires that he shall keep, if he can. But it is obvious that such an understanding refers only to very early, not to say barbarous, stages of society. Our primitive ancestors were, no doubt, in this respect no better and no worse than are the negroes of Central Africa to-day, to many of whom hunting is the sole means of sub­sistence. But as soon as ever the Gaels of Scotland and Ireland passed out of the nomadic state and became a civilised people with fixed habitations, and all the multiform rights, privileges, duties and responsibilities which such a state of society neces­sarily involves, the old happy-go-lucky, selfish and irresponsible existence could no longer be endured, and, for its own well-being and safeguard, society became hedged about, as it were, with all manner of laws with their consequent penalties and prohibi­tions. That Gaelic jurisprudence lacked what we should nowadays regard as the essential accom­paniment of an executive authority was, no doubt, a serious blot upon the social and legal system under which our ancestors lived ; but it has to be remembered that although the responsibility—even the concern—of the judge ended with the formula­tion of the sentence attaching to the cause he was by birth entitled to decide, yet public opinion was so strong that the wrong-doer or trespasser rarely, if ever, escaped the just penalty of his misdemeanour. The extraordinary "particularism," and, in some respects, exactitude of the whole body of Gaelic law—of such, at all events, as has come down to us, and it should be borne in mind that of our ancient jurisprudence but a moiety has been pre­served—joined to the swift and sure manner in which, thanks to a highly developed state of public opinion, justice was executed, forbids the notion either that the "unlawful hunter" was regarded with unconcern or that he could reckon on the sympathy of the populace to enable him to shirk or escape from the just penalties of his misdeeds.

There is one other aspect of this branch of our theme to which we should like to draw attention before bringing this head to a conclusion. The existing game laws are, no doubt, the offspring of the feudal system, but as in many other depart­ments of Scottish law, it is curious to note how much these laws have been influenced, and to some extent modified, by pre-existing Gaelic laws and customs. The vivid narrative left us by Taylor discovers to us a whole country-side employed in hunting. The men of the glens—alas! where are they now 1—go forth to the sport armed as hunters.

They even lend their hounds to " bring down the* deere," and themselves assist at the slaughter of the quarry. "And," says Taylor, "unless men are kind unto them, and are in their habite," i.e., wean the Gaelic dress, they will on no account participate] in the chase. What a difference is here exhibited; between the ruthless and barbarous manner in which the feudal game laws were executed im England, and the spirit in which the same observ­ances were administered in Scotland. A difference,! we beg leave to state, which took its rise from thej infinitely milder, more reasonable, and humane, views of our Gaelic ancestors. On the other handi it must not be imagined that under the Scottish' feudal game laws (as under the Gaelic system) thej subject was free to kill deer whenever he had