The Public Life of Dorothy Macardle
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PAGE 4 IRISH LITERARY SUPPLEMENT • SPRING 2021 Who Speaks for the Irish in the Courts? BY TONY CROWLEY Lee’s succinct formulation), this raises the a means through which Irish speakers could rather than switching between two lang- important question with which Phelan’s access justice, the policy became an uages, with the ideal of equal proficiency in ARY PHELAN ’S Irish Speakers, research engages. Which is this: If the instrument of Anglicization. Indeed, one of one or both, multilingual speakers have MInterpreters and the Courts, 1754- British state was so unremittingly hostile to the most compelling elements of this book variable levels of linguistic competence that 1921 , presents an illuminating and signifi- the Irish language (which it was), why and is the way in which it illustrates the means they apply according to context? Evidently, cant story based on voluminous research in how were interpreters used in Irish courts through which this goal was achieved in the the binary either/or of, for example, census a wide range of materials ranging from from the first record of a salaried interpreter law. For as the evidence shows, Irish returns, could not measure this practice, nor newspaper articles to parliamentary papers, in 1754 through to the establishment of the speakers were constantly bullied, ridiculed could a legal system which makes provision county archives, grand jury presentment Irish Free State? The answers to that ques- and humiliated in the courts as the state for interpretation only if a speaker is mono- books, correspondence with Dublin Castle, tion, as it turns out, are surprising in some reinforced the message about the legitimacy lingual Irish. Yet as Phelan’s detailed find- and an impressive number of cultural his- respects, predictable, if revealingly so, in of English with measures ranging from ings show repeatedly, the overwhelming tories from Ireland’s long nineteenth cen- others, and of general significance for the straightforward refusal of evidence in Irish pressure to use English in the courts, and tury. The dry and slightly forbidding title of ways in which we think about linguistic to the use of summons servers, civil bill the reluctance to provide interpretation, the work conceals what is by any standards history not just in Ireland but more broadly. officers or even policemen as interpreters combined to make justice inaccessible pre- a fascinating account of one aspect of the The stipulation that all participants in (all of whom hardly attracted the trust of cisely because participants did not fit the process by which English became the domi- the legal process be given free and fair Irish speakers). Which is not to say that the either/or model of monolingualism/biling- nant language in Ireland. This is a detailed access to the proceedings, through interpre- state did not engage fully with Irish ualism. A cúpla focal of English sufficed and important study which raises questions tation if necessary, seems commonsensical speakers when it suited its purpose; for for the courts to deem the speaker com- beyond its specific remit and illuminates to a contemporary audience. But in fact this interpretation in relation to the census, petent in the language and thus not in need central issues of language and power past principle was not settled in British law until governmental commissions, or the right to of the services of an interpreter, even if the and present. 1916 ( The King v. Lee Kun ), though it had an old age pension, the state appears to have competence was understood to be weak— if been invoked by the Secretary of the Gaelic been happy to pay. you can speak bad English it will do us,” League in a letter to the Chief Secretary of And yet, even given the parsimony of Mary Malone was advised at Ballinrobe Mary Phelan . Ireland 1897: central state provision, and the institutional petty sessions in 1870 (“is fearr Béarla IRISH SPEAKERS , INTERPRETERS AND THE COURTS , hostility towards Irish, one of the significant briste ná Gaeilge cliste”). But if, as case 1754-1921. Every person has a perfectly legal right and perhaps surprising points that Phelan’s after case suggests, people did have some FOUR COURTS PRESS IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE to be examined in the language he research indicates is the geographic and English, which they used in specific, limit- IRISH LEGAL HISTORY SOCIETY , 2019. €55. knows best, it being held that it would historical extent of interpretation in Irish ed, contexts, but not sufficient to sustain be unfair to submit a man to exami- courts. For example, focusing on grand jury them during a potentially difficult legal As early as 1613, State Papers reported nation and cross-examination by a hos- reports, a commission of enquiry, and gov- process, then how are we to categorize them that in the assizes, it was “very inconvenient tile advocate in a language with which ernmental papers for 1807, 1841-43, and in terms of the monolingual/bilingual that the judges are unacquainted with the he was but imperfectly acquainted. 1898-1901, Phelan demonstrates that in- model? Maps, censuses and statistics tend to Irish language, and cannot understand the terpretation practice was much more exten- portray language users in Ireland in black or witnesses that speak no English, whereby The dangers of linguistic injustice were sive than previous work has suggested. This white terms, but what if the reality was they cannot so well judge the case.” We clear, as Edward O’Reilly noted in the is an important finding since if the use of more complex? know little of the means by which such preface to his Sanas Gaoidhilge Sags- interpretation is a measure of the survival of This question is hardly developed in difficulties were addressed, though the beurla: An Irish English Dictionary (1817): Irish, then it may be that earlier conceptions Phelan’s study, and there are a couple of remedy was presumably a set of ad hoc “the mistake of a single word in the evi- about the “disappearance” of the language other issues that detract from the work. For arrangements put in place according to local dence, may cause the acquittal of a mur- in specific areas of the country are over- example, it bears the mark of its origins in circumstances. The situation changed with derer, or the murder of an innocent.” For stated. On the other hand, it may raise a doctoral research, and, more problemati- the introduction of The Administration of some victims of the British legal system, broader issue that Phelan’s work touches on cally, the theoretical approach to language Justice (Language) Act (Ireland) in 1737, that danger was fully realized; Myles Joyce, in passing but doesn’t explore directly. and power (largely consisting of an adapta- formally entitled “An Act that all pro- wrongly executed for his alleged role in the The issue arises from an apparent con- tion of Bourdieu’s stance) is confined to a ceedings in courts of justice within this Maamtrasna murders, is but the most tradiction: Traditional accounts of the late chapter rather than being up front and kingdom shall be in the English language.” egregious example. “death” of the Irish language paint a bleak central. But those caveats aside, Irish The act followed similar legislation in Eng- It is likely, as Phelan demonstrates, that picture of overwhelming decline, and yet Speakers, Interpreters and the Courts 1754- land (1731) and Wales (1733) and although the origins of paid interpretation in the legal Phelan’s evidence appears to indicate that 1921 is a rich, detailed and often fascinating ostensibly directed towards the proscription process in eighteenth-century Ireland began even in the courts, with all the difficulties account of the topic; it marshals a prodi- of Latin and French in the legal process, the at a relatively low level. And the unlikely that they imposed on Irish speakers, gious volume of evidence in support of an consequences for Irish were clear and long- agent of progressive practice in this respect interpretation was still required to a sur- argument that remains pertinent. For as lasting; the Act remains on the Statute book was the much maligned (rightly so for the prising degree at the turn of the twentieth Supreme Court Justice Hardiman noted in in Northern Ireland. most part) grand jury system. It was the century. But what if the linguistic situation 2001, “only a person of unusual indepen- The 1737 Act was part of the general locally constituted grand juries, dealing in Ireland in the long nineteenth century is dence of mind and pertinacity will attempt process by which the English language was with Irish speakers on a day to day basis, not best characterized through the tra- to conduct his or her legal business through elevated above Irish over a considerable that introduced provision for salaried ditional framework of the either/or model of the medium of Irish.” In Northern Ireland, period of time and through a variety of interpreters in criminal cases at the assize monolingualism/bilingualism? What if ling- of course, they wouldn’t, as yet, get the means (economic, political, and cultural). and quarter session courts (litigants in civil uistic practice in this period is better framed chance. • But given that “the whole state apparatus cases always had to pay their own interpre- in terms of the relatively recent concept of —University of Leeds was an agency of anglicisation” (in Joe tation costs). Minimal state provision translanguaging, specifically the idea that followed later, though rather than acting as The Public Life of Dorothy Macardle BY DONAL HALL 1959, as the memory of her faded, her from Dundalk, her mother, Minnie, was an member of Cumann na mBan is repeated in books went out of print and her reputation imperialist from England; Macardle herself this book.