How far do the sources suggest that the British authorities responded to the 1916 Easter rising with excessive force?
Source 1 portrays the view of George Bernard Shaw, through the form of a letter written to the Daily News within this he shows his dislike towards the British Government for not raising their ‘voice’ at the punishments handed to the leaders of the rising. He shows that he feels the force was excessive when explaining that the ‘Government shot first’ and ‘told the public second’ voicing his anger that they had no time to protest against the punishment that was to be handed to them. He further goes on to portray the force as excessive by explain that he believed them to be ‘prisoners of war’ and therefore he believed it was incorrect to slaughter them’ which further supports the view that it was an excessive use of force.
This view although not entirely voiced is also supported in source 3. The Source however does not state that the use of force was excessive however implies it, ‘stating that Asquith went to Dublin to prevent further risings’. It is surprising that the source does not condemn the actions of the government as it quite clearly states that there was ‘bitterness’ surrounding it. Also considering the letter was sent by an Irish Nationalist MP, you would assume that his opinion on the matter would be outrage as the country they are fighting to break union with has murdered some of his own. Although they don’t come from the same party they share the similar ideology that the Union should not stand.
On the other hand Source 2 seems to condone the actions and force displayed by the government. Although expected due to its origin, a prominent English newspaper, you would expect for it to maybe raise more than one interpretation as to whether it was excessive or not. The source states the executions were ‘absolutely necessary’ going on to explain that it was to ‘teach the traitors a lesson’. This being said the view of the times does seem to offer up an opinion that questions the government on ‘why the reason for the men being shot’ were not released. These could almost be seen as support for the views expressed by George Bernard Shaw, they both seem to imply, that there was little reason for them to be shot despite source 2 completely condoning the violence. Source 2 almost contradicts itself.
From the sources I believe that the sources present a divided opinion on whether the British Authorities used excessive force. However I do not believe this to be irregular due to the origins of the source that come from either side of the predicament. However I believe that the force used was excessive as like George, in source 1, presents they were prisoners of war, and that even the government had little reason to use such excessive force as they did not release the real reason as to why they did it as stated in source 2.
In conclusion I believe that the government used excessive force to make an example of the Irish men and that if they had dealt with the situation more liberally it might have cause4d less problem between the sides in the future.