I had very little money and one day
the toll-taker at the metal bridge over the Liffey
and a gossip of his laughed when I refused the halfpenny
and said “no, I will go round by O’Connell
Bridge.” When I called for the first time
at a house in Leinster Road several middle-aged women
were playing cards and suggested my taking a hand
and gave me a glass of sherry. The sherry went
to my head and I was impoverished for days by the
loss of sixpence. My hostess was Ellen O’Leary,
who kept house for her brother John O’Leary
the Fenian, the handsomest old man I had ever seen.
He had been condemned to twenty years penal servitude
but had been set free after five on condition that
he did not return to Ireland for fifteen years.
He had said to the government, “I will not return
if Germany makes war on you, but I will return if
France does.” He and his old sister lived
exactly opposite the Orange leader for whom he had
a great respect. His sister stirred my affection
at first for no better reason than her likeness of
face and figure to the matron of my London school,
a friendly person, but when I came to know her I found
sister and brother alike were of Plutarch’s
people. She told me of her brother’s life,
how in his youth as now in his age, he would spend
his afternoons searching for rare books among second-hand
book-shops, how the Fenian organizer James Stephens
had found him there and asked for his help. “I
do not think you have any chance of success,”
he had said, “but if you never ask me to enroll
anybody else I will join, it will be very good for
the morals of the country.” She told me
how it grew to be a formidable movement, and of the
arrests that followed (I believe that her own sweetheart
had somehow fallen among the wreckage,) of sentences
of death pronounced upon false evidence amid a public
panic, and told it all without bitterness. No
fanaticism could thrive amid such gentleness.
She never found it hard to believe that an opponent
had as high a motive as her own and needed upon her
difficult road no spur of hate.
Her brother seemed very unlike on
a first hearing for he had some violent oaths, “Good
God in Heaven” being one of them; and if he disliked
anything one said or did, he spoke all his thought,
but in a little one heard his justice match her charity.
“Never has there been a cause so bad,”
he would say, “that it has not been defended
by good men for good reasons.” Nor would
he overvalue any man because they shared opinions;
and when he lent me the poems of Davis and the Young
Irelanders, of whom I had known nothing, he did not,
although the poems of Davis had made him a patriot,
claim that they were very good poetry.
His room was full of books, always
second-hand copies that had often been ugly and badly
printed when new and had not grown to my unhistoric
mind more pleasing from the dirt of some old Dublin
book-shop. Great numbers were Irish, and for
the first time I began to read histories and verses
that a Catholic Irishman knows from boyhood. He
seemed to consider politics almost wholly as a moral
discipline, and seldom said of any proposed course
of action that it was practical or otherwise.
When he spoke to me of his prison life he spoke of
all with seeming freedom, but presently one noticed
that he never spoke of hardship and if one asked him
why, he would say, “I was in the hands of my
enemies, why should I complain?” I have heard
since that the governor of his jail found out that
he had endured some unnecessary discomfort for months
and had asked why he did not speak of it. “I
did not come here to complain,” was the answer.
He had the moral genius that moves all young people
and moves them the more if they are repelled by those
who have strict opinions and yet have lived commonplace
lives. I had begun, as would any other of my training,
to say violent and paradoxical things to shock provincial
sobriety, and Dowden’s ironical calm had come
to seem but a professional pose. But here was
something as spontaneous as the life of an artist.
Sometimes he would say things that would have sounded
well in some heroic Elizabethan play. It became
my delight to rouse him to these outbursts for I was
the poet in the presence of his theme. Once when
I was defending an Irish politician who had made a
great outcry because he was treated as a common felon,
by showing that he did it for the cause’s sake,
he said, “there are things that a man must not
do even to save a nation.” He would speak
a sentence like that in ignorance of its passionate
value, and would forget it the moment after.
I met at his house friends of later
life, Katharine Tynan who still lived upon her father’s
farm, and Dr. Hyde, still a college student who took
snuff like those Mayo county people, whose stories
and songs he was writing down. “Davitt
wants followers by the thousand,” O’Leary
would say, “I only want half-a-dozen.”
One constant caller looked at me with much hostility,
John F. Taylor, an obscure great orator. The other
day in Dublin I overheard a man murmuring to another
one of his speeches as I might some Elizabethan lyric
that is in my very bones. It was delivered at
some Dublin debate, some College society perhaps.
The Lord Chancellor had spoken with balanced unemotional
sentences now self-complacent, now in derision.
Taylor began hesitating and stopping for words, but
after speaking very badly for a little, straightened
his figure and spoke as out of a dream: “I
am carried to another age, a nobler court, and another
Lord Chancellor is speaking. I am at the court
of the first Pharaoh.” Thereupon he put
into the mouth of that Egyptian all his audience had
listened to, but now it was spoken to the children
of Israel. “If you have any spirituality
as you boast, why not use our great empire to spread
it through the world, why still cling to that beggarly
nationality of yours? what are its history and its
works weighed with those of Egypt.” Then
his voice changed and sank: “I see a man
at the edge of the crowd; he is standing listening
there, but he will not obey;” and then with his
voice rising to a cry, “had he obeyed he would
never have come down the mountain carrying in his
arms the tables of the Law in the language of the outlaw.”
He had been in a linen-draper’s
shop for a while, had educated himself and put himself
to college, and was now, as a lawyer, famous for hopeless
cases where unsure judgment could not make things worse,
and eloquence, power of cross-examination and learning
might amend all. Conversation with him was always
argument, and for an obstinate opponent he had such
phrases as, “have you your head in a bag, sir?”
and I seemed his particular aversion. As with
many of the self-made men of that generation, Carlyle
was his chief literary enthusiasm, supporting him,
as he believed, in his contempt for the complexities
and refinements he had not found in his hard life,
and I belonged to a generation that had begun to call
Carlyle rhetorician and demagogue. I had once
seen what I had believed to be an enraged bull in
a field and had walked up to it as a test of courage
to discover, just as panic fell upon me, that it was
merely an irritable cow. I braved Taylor again
and again, but always found him worse than my expectation.
I would say, quoting Mill, “oratory is heard,
poetry is overheard.” And he would answer,
his voice full of contempt, that there was always
an audience; and yet, in his moments of lofty speech,
he himself was alone no matter what the crowd.
At other times his science or his
Catholic orthodoxy, I never could discover which,
would become enraged with my supernaturalism.
I can but once remember escaping him unabashed and
unconquered. I said with deliberate exaggeration
at some evening party at O’Leary’s “five
out of every six people have seen a ghost;”
and Taylor fell into my net with “well, I will
ask everybody here.” I managed that the
first answer should come from a man who had heard
a voice he believed to be that of his dead brother,
and the second from a doctor’s wife who had lived
in a haunted house and met a man with his throat cut,
whose throat as he drifted along the garden-walk “had
opened and closed like the mouth of a fish.”
Taylor threw up his head like an angry horse, but
asked no further question, and did not return to the
subject that evening. If he had gone on he would
have heard from everybody some like story though not
all at first hand, and Miss O’Leary would have
told him what happened at the death of one of the
MacManus brothers, well known in the politics of Young
Ireland. One brother was watching by the bed
where the other lay dying and saw a strange hawk-like
bird fly through the open window and alight upon the
breast of the dying man. He did not dare to drive
it away and it remained there, as it seemed, looking
into his brother’s eyes until death came, and
then it flew out of the window. I think, though
I am not sure, that she had the story from the watcher
himself.
It was understood that Taylor’s
temper kept him from public life, though he may have
been the greatest orator of his time, partly because
no leader would accept him, and still more because,
in the words of one of his Dublin enemies, “he
had never joined any party and as soon as one joined
him he seceded.” With O’Leary he was
always, even when they differed, as they often did,
gentle and deferential, but once only, and that was
years afterwards, did I think that he was about to
include me among his friends. We met by chance
in a London street and he stopped me with an abrupt
movement: “Yeats,” he said, “I
have been thinking. If you and ... (naming another
aversion,) were born in a small Italian principality
in the Middle Ages, he would have friends at court
and you would be in exile with a price on your head.”
He went off without another word, and the next time
we met he was no less offensive than before. He,
imprisoned in himself, and not the always unperturbed
O’Leary, comes before me as the tragic figure
of my youth. The same passion for all moral and
physical splendour that drew him to O’Leary
would make him beg leave to wear, for some few days,
a friend’s ring or pin, and gave him a heart
that every pretty woman set on fire. I doubt
if he was happy in his loves; for those his powerful
intellect had fascinated were, I believe, repelled
by his coarse red hair, his gaunt ungainly body, his
stiff movements as of a Dutch doll, his badly rolled,
shabby umbrella. And yet with women, as with O’Leary,
he was gentle, deferential, almost diffident.
A Young Ireland Society met in the
lecture hall of a workman’s club in York Street
with O’Leary for president, and there four or
five university students and myself and occasionally
Taylor spoke on Irish history or literature.
When Taylor spoke, it was a great event, and his delivery
in the course of a speech or lecture of some political
verse by Thomas Davis gave me a conviction of how
great might be the effect of verse spoken by a man
almost rhythm-drunk at some moment of intensity, the
apex of long mounting thought. Verses that seemed
when one saw them upon the page flat and empty caught
from that voice, whose beauty was half in its harsh
strangeness, nobility and style. My father had
always read verse with an equal intensity and a greater
subtlety, but this art was public and his private,
and it is Taylor’s voice that rings in my ears
and awakens my longing when I have heard some player
speak lines, “so naturally,” as a famous
player said to me, “that nobody can find out
that it is verse at all.” I made a good
many speeches, more I believe as a training for self-possession
than from desire of speech.
Once our debates roused a passion
that came to the newspapers and the streets.
There was an excitable man who had fought for the Pope
against the Italian patriots and who always rode a
white horse in our Nationalist processions. He
got on badly with O’Leary who had told him that
“attempting to oppress others was a poor preparation
for liberating your own country.” O’Leary
had written some letter to the press condemning the
“Irish-American Dynamite Party” as it was
called, and defining the limits of “honourable
warfare.” At the next meeting, the papal
soldier rose in the middle of the discussion on some
other matter and moved a vote of censure on O’Leary.
“I myself” he said “do not approve
of bombs, but I do not think that any Irishman should
be discouraged.” O’Leary ruled him
out of order. He refused to obey and remained
standing. Those round him began to threaten.
He swung the chair he had been sitting on round his
head and defied everybody. However he was seized
from all sides and thrown out, and a special meeting
called to expel him. He wrote letters to the papers
and addressed a crowd somewhere. “No Young
Ireland Society,” he protested, “could
expel a man whose grandfather had been hanged in 1798.”
When the night of the special meeting came his expulsion
was moved, but before the vote could be taken an excited
man announced that there was a crowd in the street,
that the papal soldier was making a speech, that in
a moment we should be attacked. Three or four
of us ran and put our backs to the door while others
carried on the debate. It was an inner door with
narrow glass windows at each side and through these
we could see the street-door and the crowd in the
street. Presently a man asked us through the crack
in the door if we would as a favour “leave the
crowd to the workman’s club upstairs.”
In a couple of minutes there was a great noise of sticks
and broken glass, and after that our landlord came
to find out who was to pay for the hall-lamp.