Equality of treatment

A chairde,

I am concerned at the growing usage by some republicans of the phrase ``equality of opportunity''. Some people seem to think that this phrase is equivalent to, and even interchangeable with the phrase ``equality of treatment''. It is not.

The crucial distinction between the two concepts can be seen in the following example.

Currently, within the north, public housing is allocated by the Housing Executive, who assess each applicant on the basis of a points system, thereby ensuring that everyone is assessed within the same set procedure. This is the tokenist provision of ``equality of opportunity'', that is, to be housed.

However, since it is within the discretion and power of one or two individuals to actually allocate the very limited housing available in each district, it is invariably the case that a select number of applicants receive preference in terms of allocations. This is normally based on the personal/political contacts of the allocating officer and of the relevant applicant.

Given the so-called ``appeals procedure'' in place, and the overarching tenancy laws, it is impossible to have clearly unfair allocations, like this, reversed.

So it is that the Housing Executive can trumpet their commitment to ``equality of opportunity'', while quite blatantly trampling over the right of every citizen to ``equality of treatment''.

This continues to be the situation in every other aspect of citizens' rights within the north; employment, culture, politics, economics, education etc. etc.

``Equality of opportunity'' is a clever civil service buzzword, which is capable of disguising discrimination and concealing corruption. ``Equality of treatment'' is a basic right, which must become our watchword in our collective efforts to promote our politics and improve the lives of our people.

We must never confuse the two concepts, either through laziness or through lack of thought.

D. O Coilain
Doire

Ireland Institute

A chairde,

I write in reply to your editorial of 5 November.

I was surprised at the snide, sarcastic and uncivil tone of your description of the series of lectures given under the auspices of Institúid na hEireann. You describe them as ``reconstructed and unreconstructed republicans called the Ireland Institute, to commemorate three lectures given by their idol Patrick Pearse''.

You then proceed to make them the butt of the problems which they allegedly encountered, showing no interest in the content of the lectures designed to widen interest in Irish Republicanism. You don't hesitate to slight their efforts and their ``idol Patrick Pearse''. You then go on to describe in uncomplimentary tones that well known Protestant Republican Martin Manseragh as ``Fianna Fail's spin doctor''.

I am curious to know what you hope to achieve for the national struggle for final freedom, equality and justice by these tactics. I hope for enlightenment in your next issue, please.

I and my colleagues working here in West Africa are regular readers of your newspaper as a means of keeping in touch with the truth of what is happening in the occupied six counties. I have noted what I would regard as counter productive remarks in previous editorials but none as blatant as the one referred to above. Is it too much to ask for a more constructive approach to Institúid na hEireann and others sympathetic to Irish nationalism but not quite reaching the purity of your personal brand of Bible Belt republicanism?

Hugo V Flinn

Editor replies: The piece referred to was in Editor's Desk; it wasn't an editorial. Editor's Desk is a light-hearted section and the piece on the Ireland Institute was in no way designed to slight their efforts. The tone of the piece was not ``snide, sarcastic and uncivil''. An Phoblacht as a newspaper, and members of staff in individual capacities, have supported the work of the Institute since its inception.

Wexford thanks

A chairde,

Wexford pikemen and women and their families would like to thank the people of Monaghan and Cavan for the wonderful reception they gave us during their 1798 commemoration events. We would specially like to thank the host families who looked after us all that weekend.

And we would also like to thank all those involved, and specially the organisers, of the Eddentubber commemoration, and the staff at the Ravensdale Hotel, for the reunion, which was for us a very moving occasion.

And a special thanks to the bands for playing the Wexford songs.

Joe Cullen
Gorey
Wexford

Meilt Ama

A chairde,

Aisling thar a bheith cúng atá ag an chompántas amharclainne Aisling Ghearr agus iad ag cur stó orthu féin leaganacha Gaeilge de Kathleen Ní Houlihan agus The Rising of the Moon a chur ar an ardán(An Phoblacht 19 Samhain). Goidé faoi dtaobh den lear mór scripteanna a bhain duaiseanna Oireachtais amach agus nár léiríodh fós? Ní chuireann aistriúcháin ón Bhéarla leis an amharclannaíocht Ghaeilge. Ní féidir ach le bundrámaí Gaeilge a leithéid a chruthú.

Pé ar bith ní fheictear dom go bhfuil dealramh le Yeats agus Gregory a aistriú go Gaeilge. Tá blas Famine Relief Scheme ar an fhiontar.

Colm de Faoite
Baile Atha Cliath

Casement's remains

A chairde,

I refer to the dismissive remarks about the remains of Roger Casement contained in the article ``Nationalism on Film'' by Michael Tovey in your issue of 19 November. In his otherwise fine piece, Mr Tovey mentions a film report on the reinterment of Roger Casement at Glasnevin in 1965 and continues: ``The subsequent revelation at the conference that the coffin only contained stones, as the dead patriot's body had been rendered after execution by quicklime, seemed to serve as an appropriate and ironic commentary on the hypocrisy of the assembled politicians, including a young and solemn looking Finance Minister, Charles Haughey''.

That is false.

I write as someone who has published many articles on Roger Casement over the past forty years, who is well acquainted with his life and times, and who recently, with my friend John Boland, had the honour of presenting to Gaelscoil Mhic Easmainn in Tralee the plate from which Casement ate his meals during his appearance at the Court of Criminal Appeal in London on 17 and 18 July, 1916.

There is no doubt whatever that Roger Casement's remains, and not `stones' as you published, were reinterred on 1 March, 1965.

Before the British Prime Minister Harold Wilson formally announced that the remains of Roger Casement were on their way from England to Ireland, there were, of course, prior negotiations, precision about detail, arrangements for on-site monitoring of the exhumation, ascertaining the correct grave, and, especially, verification of the remains.

Practice in the British and Irish Prison Services coincided to a considerable extent. Nowhere was this more so than in procedures relating to executions and their aftermath. A record was kept by Prison Governors of the location and occupancy of every grave, which was otherwise unmarked. Graves could ultimately contain two or three occupants. There was no quicklime involved. Calcification was never a feature of burials involving civil, as distinct from military, executions in England.

The remains of executed persons were always enveloped, sometimes in canvass but more often in plain deal coffins. Graves, whenever reopened, were reopened by Prison Service Trade Staff and not by prisoners.

A senior official from the Department of Justice was one of the monitoring party present at the exhumation of Roger Casement. That monitoring party was there especially to ensure the authenticity of the remains. This official and a senior British Probation Officer, seconded at the time to Pentonville Jail as a Welfare Officer, who was assigned to Irish officals to facilitate their movements within the jail, later separately described what happened. I suspect that English offical was given that particular job because he was a Catholic.

As was generally known in Ireland to those interested in Roger Casement, the grave was along a wall. It was precisely located without difficulty. It contained the remains of three persons. Roger Casement's remains were lowest.

The two uppermost were disinterred. A little lower than the second remains traces of rotting sacking were uncovered. This was carefully removed. Undisturbed skeletal remains were disclosed. The witnesses never anticipated such cogent identification. It registered deeply on the two officers who later spoke separately about it.

Roger Casement's jet-black hair had survived and the remarkable length of the leg bones reflected his striking stature.

I apologise for the length and detail of this letter. However, I think facts rather fiction should prevail about everything to do with that idealistic and gallant man Roger Casement.

Proinsias Mac Aonghusa