THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 

 
 RECENT EVENTS, 
 
 AND A 
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION.
 
 RECENT EVENTS 
 
 AND A 
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 THE RIGHT HON. 
 LORD ROBERTtMONTAGU. 
 
 SECOND EDITION. 
 
 Bonbon : 
 
 HODDER AND STOUGHTON, 
 27, PATERNOSTER ROW. 
 
 MDCCCLXXXVI. 
 
 [All rights reserved.]
 
 BUTLER Si TANNER, 
 
 THE SELWOOD PRINTING WORKS, 
 
 FROME, AND LONDON.
 
 PA 
 
 5*0 
 (g& 
 
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 e/Ir has been a matter of congratulation to me, that, of all 
 
 SJthe " astounding statements " which reviewers have found 
 
 >-m this book, only one point of very minor importance 
 
 j<should have been discovered, by the keen and malignant 
 
 Eeyes of the enemy, on which an attack could be safely 
 
 delivered. Nor was there a practicable breach in that one 
 
 point, until it had been garbled, and twisted, and distorted, 
 
 and I had been made to say the very opposite to that which 
 
 I did say. Then the very truthful reviewers derided my 
 
 supposed assertion, and cut the matter short by exclaiming: 
 
 " the book is full of such cock-and-bull stories." 1 I refer 
 
 to a paragraph on page 59. It will be perceived that I 
 
 there quote a statement from the Pope's newspaper, by 
 
 which the world was informed that Lord Beaconsfield, on 
 
 ]^his death-bed, had made an abjuration of Protestantism. 
 
 As I had mentioned a letter from a Jesuit, in which the 
 .reverend gentleman said he had "received" Mr. D'Israeli 
 in the winter of i835-'36, it was clear to me that he could 
 not have made such an abjuration in 1882 ; and I therefore 
 charged that Papal organ with printing a deliberate false- 
 hood, in order to discredit the suspicion that Mr. D'Israeli 
 had been a tool of the Roman Curia, the whole time that 
 he was in Parliament I could not, therefore, accept the 
 statement of the Pope's journal. 
 
 It was true that Mr. D'Israeli had given very great 
 
 offence to the Jesuit party while he was with Prince 
 
 Bismarck at the Congress of Berlin. That offence might 
 
 g have required " reconciliation " with the Church. But that 
 
 : is a very different thing from an abjuration of Protestantism. 
 
 J| l e.g. Leeds Mercury, May 29 ; Nonconformist^ June 3 ; Northern 
 Whig, July 22.
 
 vi PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 What, then, is to be thought of the numerous reviewers 
 and editors, in this country and in the Colonies, who have 
 falsified that one passage of my book, and made me 
 that Lord Beaconsfield then made the abjuration which 
 he had made forty-six years before? They either hac 
 not read the book which they pretended to review, vi 
 would have been a most dishonest transaction ; c 
 they deliberately garbled and falsified a passage, in . 
 to damage the book. That the latter was the case, i 
 proved by the fact that I wrote to many editors begg 
 them to correct the statement ; and yet not one, except 
 the editor of the Scottish News and two others, had 
 honesty to do so. 
 
 The fact is not difficult to interpret Mr. Hahburton 
 correctly wrote that: "Ever since the Roman Cathol 
 " Emancipation Act, a swarm of writers have been educa- 
 " ted by them (the Jesuits), and let loose upon the political, 
 "and even in some instances upon the religious press of 
 "the country." Those writers appear as Conservatives, a 
 Liberals, as Protestants, or as Freethinkers. They always 
 "take care" of every politician who is a tool of the Jesuit 
 party, giving him good reports of his speeches, and heaping 
 high encomiums on him in their leading articles. A Jesuit 
 organ in 1869 openly boasted : " There is not in London a 
 " single newspaper of which some of the leading reporters, 
 and one or more of the chief persons on the staff, are not 
 " Catholics. . . . There is not a magazine published 
 " in London, of which one or more of the contributors 
 are not Catholics ; and the leading burlesque writer of 
 " the day belongs to the same Church." A well-known 
 Journalist, who " had the management of newspapers in 
 " many parts of the kingdom," complained that " he had 
 "found it wholly impossible to make head against the 
 "combination of influences which the Roman Catholic 
 " Priesthood had woven around the newspaper press." 
 added that: "England is in far greater peril from the 
 " state of the press, than, in any period of her history, she
 
 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. vii 
 
 " had been from any domestic or foreign foes ; " and that 
 "the steady labour of the Roman Priesthood, with un- 
 " limited money at their command, having been, since 
 "1852, unceasingly directed to bring under control the 
 " press of England, has been attended with a success 
 "beyond anything known in the annals of that great 
 "conspiracy against the liberties and happiness of man- 
 "kind." Mr. Haliburton also asserts that a majority of 
 the reporters in the House of Commons have been specially 
 trained by the Jesuits for that purpose ; and that the 
 Jesuits have similarly, for years, been supplying reporters 
 to the provincial press. It is clear, then, that the news- 
 paper reports are in Jesuit hands, and that they can make 
 or mar any reputation. It is clear, also, that no one can 
 succeed in achieving Parliamentary fame and influence, 
 unless he is a willing tool of the Jesuits. 
 
 The Catholic Times of May 28th, 1880, boasted that 
 Punch was in the hands of the Romanists ; and that the 
 Standard included Romanists on its staff; while Romanist 
 writers were at work on most of the Leading Journals, 
 and the Monthly Magazines. It added that : " Of course 
 " their contributions are, for the most part, colourless in 
 " religion." 
 
 As to the Times, to which least suspicion is apt to attach 
 of being under Romish influence, the Christian of April 
 1 3th, 1882, remarked that it had admitted a letter attacking 
 some Protestant Missionaries on the Rhine, while " neither 
 " of two authoritative replies, vindicating the Protestant 
 " Mission, was allowed insertion in the journal that pub- 
 " lished the attack. Such conduct on the part of a great 
 " Protestant organ deserves to be sternly reprobated." So 
 much may suffice for the persistent and profligate per- 
 version of a passage of my book, for the purpose of bring- 
 ing it into contempt. 
 
 Many, who have regarded the book in a friendly spirit, 
 have offered the following criticism : " If you had merely 
 " attacked Gladstone, and left Beaconsfield alone, you would
 
 viii PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 "have found that the Tories would, have taken it up 
 " warmly ; or, if you had only inveighed against Lord 
 " Beaconsfield, the Liberals would have pushed the sale of 
 " your book." To this, the reply was simple : I did not 
 wish to attack either Gladstone or D'Israeli ; but I wished 
 to awaken the people of England to the fact that a con- 
 spiracy, has been, and is being carried on, by leaders 
 of both parties, to bring England under the dominion of 
 Rome. Unfortunately Englishmen are so imbued with 
 party spirit, that they cannot believe the leaders to be in 
 unison. They persist in supposing that there is a real, not 
 a feigned antagonism, between certain leaders on the 
 opposite sides. Yet there are some, in every party, who 
 really mould the action of their party, and pretend to be 
 in opposition, while they are working for a common end. 
 The history of the Stuarts is full of undoubted testimony 
 that, even in those days, the cleverest and most active 
 members of opposing parties belonged to the same Jesuit 
 Society, and manipulated their respective parties so that 
 Rome should attain her objects. l 
 
 Many cannot believe that wickedness can be so rampant 
 in " high places." Then let them consult the works of 
 Liguori, a saint and doctor of the Roman Church, whose 
 writings have been authoritatively set before Romanists as 
 their monitor and guide. There they will find the follow- 
 ing admonition : 2 " Licet aliquando dissimulare veram 
 fidem, cum adest justa causa. . . . Cum non rogaris 
 de fide, non solum licet, sed saepe melius est et utilius ad 
 Dei honorem et aliorum salutem, de fide tua tacere, quam 
 earn aperte profited. Immo, saepe temerarium esset sese 
 ultro infidelibus prodere, si exinde turbationes oriri pos- 
 sent." 
 
 ROBT. MONTAGU. 
 
 1 "Address on the Times of the Stuarts." By the Author. (Kensit, 
 1 8, Paternoster Row.) Price 2d. 
 
 2 Bk. II., Tract. I. cap. 2 14.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 TYRCONNEL'S POLICY. 
 No. I. King James II. and Tyrconnel, p. 2. 
 
 No. II. Ditto (continued), p. 5. Ecclesiastical Courts, p. 8. 
 Jesuit Advances, p. 9. Cardinal Manning as Nuncio, p. 9. His Writ- 
 ings, p. 10. 
 
 No. III. Features of Tyrconnel's plan, p. 1 1. Mr. Gladstone, 
 Dec 19, 1867, p. 12. Mr. Gladstone, Oct. 23, 1868, p. 12. The 
 Upas-tree, p. 14. Mr. Gladstone, Oct. 21, 1868, p. i$.Osservatore 
 Romano and Mr. D'Israeli, p. 15. Mr. Gladstone, Oct. 12, 1868, 
 p. 1 6. 
 
 RECENT LEGISLATION. 
 
 No. IV. Sir John Gray, Aug. 21, 1868, p. 17. Freemeufs Journal, 
 Aug. 26, p. 17. Sir John Gray, Oct., 1868, p. 18. Mr. Bright, Nov. 
 5, p. 19. Weekly Register, Oct. 31, p. 21. Cardinal Manning, p. 21. 
 Perrone, p. 21. 
 
 No. V. O'Connell, p. 22. The Fenian Oath, p. 22. The Action of 
 the Priests, p. 22. Maynooth Grant, 1845, P- 23. Watson's Bill, 
 1846, p. 24. Univers, March 28, 1868, p. 25. Sonderbund War, 
 p< 25. The Curia of Rome, p. 26. 
 
 No. VI. Education of Rome, p. 26. Cardinal Cullen, 1866, p. 27 
 Treasury Committee, p. 28. Archbishop McHale, Aug. 8, 1868, 
 p. 28. Cardinal Manning ; the aim of the Papacy, p. 29. Continental 
 War, p. 3o.-Repeal of the R. C. Oath, 1865, p. 31. Kilmainham 
 Treaty, April 21, 1866, p. 31. Cardinal Manning on the Oaths Bill, 
 p. 32. Mr. Gladstone on the Oaths Bill, p. 32.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No. VII. Act of Settlement in 1866, p. 33. Office and Oaths Bill, 
 etc., 1867, p. 34. Denial of the Queen's Supremacy, p. 35. The Pro- 
 testant Succession, 1868, p. 35. Cardinal Manning's Declaration, 
 P-35- He said the Royal Supremacy is gone,p.86. SirMichael Beach, 
 p. 36. McEvoy's Bill and Mr. Gladstone, 1867, p. 37. Mr. Spencer 
 Walpole's Report, p. 37. Mr. Gladstone's attack on the Irish Church, 
 p. 37. The Dean of Limerick, p. 38. The Bishop of Meath, p. 38. 
 " Alien Church," p. 38. Mr. Dillwyn's Motion and Mr. Gladstone, 
 1865, p. 39. The Romish College and Mr. Gladstone, p. 39. Mr 
 Bright and the Fenian Petition, p. 39. 
 
 No. VIII. Sir J. Gray's motion and Mr. Gladstone, 1867, p. 40. 
 Bishop Moriarty and the Irish Church, p. 40. Mr. Bright at Limer- 
 ick, i868,p. 41. Irish Bishops and Priests in 1843, p. 41. Archbishop 
 McHale, p. 42. The Bishop of Limerick, p. 43. Dr. O'Brien, 1867, 
 p. 43. The Rotunda Meeting and the Fenians, 1869, p. 44. Father 
 Lavelle, p. 44. Mr. Gladstone, p. 45. The Roman Curia, p. 45. 
 
 MR. D'lSRAELI AND MR. GLADSTONE. 
 
 No. IX. Their plans for Disestablishing the Irish Church, p. 48. 
 Mr. Gladstone, Cardinal Cullen, and Cardinal Manning, p. 50. Car- 
 dinal Manning's Letter, June 29, 1872, p. 50. Mr. D'Israeli's Com- 
 mittee on R. C. Education, p. 31. His Instructions for the Mission 
 to Cardinal Antonelli, p. 52. 
 
 No. X. Mr. D'Israeli's Speeches of 1844 and 1868, p. 33. Sept. 27, 
 1876, Mr. Gladstone's Vatican Decrees, p. 55. Tory Democracy, p. 55. 
 Mr. D'Israeli's Speeches, June 17, 1868, and June 24, 1872, p. 56. 
 Mr. Gladstone's Letter to Mr. Irving, Dec. 30, 1879, p. 56. Mr. 
 Gladstone's Speech, Nov. 26, 1869, p. 57. Sir J. Acton and Mr. Glad- 
 stone's Views, p. 57. Sir John Hennessy, p. 58. Journal de Rome, 
 Nov. 21, 1882, on Mr. D'Israeli's Death, p. 59. 
 
 No. XL Mr. Gladstone's Vaticanism, p. 59. Mr. D'Israeli re- 
 ceived by a Jesuit, p. 60. Session of 1874. Public Worship Bill, 
 p. 60. Mr. Gladstone's line of action, p. 61. The Tablet on Mr. Glad- 
 stone, p. 61. Father Forbes, S.J., on the Public Worship Regulation 
 Bill, p. 62. Mr. Gladstone and Mr. D'Israeli, p. 63. 
 
 CONSPIRACY IN THE CHURCH. 
 
 No. XII. Ritualists are a net, etc., p. 64. Bishop of Gloucester's 
 Charge, p. 65. The Tablet on Canon Liddon, p. 66. Appointments 
 of Ritualists, p. 66. Journal de Rome, Jan. 24, 1883, p. 67. Bishop of 
 Manchester, p. 67. Archbishop of Canterbury, p. 68. -Journal de 
 Rome, 1884, p. 68. Bishop of Lincoln, p. 68. English Working Men's 
 Society, p. 69. The Durham Letter, p. 69.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No. XIII. A Canon's Letters on Jesuits as Clergy, p. 70. Pressure 
 put on the Clergy to Romanize, p. 72. Journal de Rome, 1884, p. 73. 
 The Jesuit Society, p. 75. 
 
 MR. D'ISRAELI AS PRIME MINISTER. 
 
 No. XIV. Mr. D'Israeli on a R. C. University, March 20, 1873, 
 p. 78. His Bill in 1879, p. 78. The previous Intrigue, p. 79. Obstruc- 
 tion used, p. 80. Pension for R. C. Teachers, p. 80. Sir S. North- 
 cote, July 24, 1879, P- 81. Mr. Gladstone's Speech, p. 81. Mr. 
 Lowther's Clause, p. 83. Mr. Forster's Protest, p. 84. 
 
 No. XV. Irish Education Bill, 1873, P- 84. Mr. Gladstone as 
 Leader of the Nonconformists, p. 85. The contre-coup against 
 Russia, p. 85. Mr. Gladstone to take a Protestant line, p. 86. Dis- 
 solution of 1874, P- 86. "Is the Church of England worth pre- 
 serving?" p. 87. "The Courses of Religious Thought," p. 87. Mr. 
 P. J. Smyth, p. 88. Mr. Gladstone's Letter, July 21, 1865, p. 89. 
 The Nineteenth Century ; March, 1877, P- 89. 
 
 MR. GLADSTONE. 
 
 No. XVI. Mr. Arundel Rogers, p. 90. Mr. Gladstone on the 
 Regium Donum and Maynooth, p. 91. Mr. Gladstone and Sir Walter 
 Scott, p. 91. Mr. Gladstone resigns the Leadership, p. 92. The 
 Elections of 1880, p. 93. Telegram from Rome, p. 93. Declaration 
 on Education, p. 94. Mr. Gladstone resumes the Leadership, p. 95. 
 His Appointments, p. 96. 
 
 PLOT TO BREAK UP BOTH PARTIES. 
 
 No. XVII. The Plot to break up both Parties, p. 97. Death of 
 Lord Eglington, p. 98. Mr. D'Israeli, on the Temporal Power, 1862, 
 p. 99. The Morning Post on Mr. D'Israeli, p. 100. Plot to break up 
 Parliament, 1877, p. 100. Lord Salisbury at Constantinople, p. 101. 
 The Plot and Mr. Gladstone in 1877, p. 101. Tory Democracy, p. 
 103. 
 
 No. XVIII. Plot to break up both Parties, p. 103. Mr. Gladstone 
 on Lord Salisbury, p. 104. Mr. Gladstone's endeavour to break up 
 the Liberals, p. 104. The Civiltd, Cattolica, 1878, p. 105. Mr. Hardy 
 made a Peer, p. 105. The Civiltd, Cattolica on the Elections of 1880. 
 p. 106. Mr. D'Israeli's intentions in Dissolving, p. 107. The Dis- 
 turbance Bill, p. 108. Mr. Gorst and the Conservative Party, p. 109. 
 The Fourth Party, p. 109.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 HOME RULE. 
 
 No XIX. Home Rule, p. i lo.-The Young England Party, p. 1 1 1. 
 -Cardinal Manning and Home Rule, 1872, p. in.-The Jesuits 
 Home Rule, 1873, P- "'-Mr. Gladstone and Home Ru e 1877- 
 p II3 _ Governing the Irish by Irish Ideas," p. 113.-" On the I 
 lenic Factor," p. ii 3 .-Mr. Gladstone, on Nov. 8, i8 7 7, P ; "4- 
 O'Connor Power, Sept. 10, 1877, P- 114 Mr. O'Donnell, Oct. 28, 
 1877, p. 115. Mr. Gladstone, Nov. 26, 1879, p. 115- 
 
 No XX. Lord Granville, Feb. 5, 1880, p. 117. Lord Beaconsfield, 
 p 1 17 -Mr. Gladstone, Nov. 7, 1882, p. 117. -Lord R. Churchill, 
 3 ' u8-Mr. Gladstone's Home Rule Promises, p. ii8.-Archbishop 
 C'roke Feb. 10, 1883, p. n8.-Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Clemenceau, 
 p no-Lord Hartington, p. Ii 9 .-Mr. H. Gladstone, p. Il-Mr. 
 Gladstone, Feb. 27, 1880, p. 120. The Jesuits' Platform Jan. 12 
 1874 p I20.-The Irish Party, Jan., 1875, P- 121. -Sir M. Beach and 
 Col King-Harman, p. 122. Mr. D'Israeli's Home Rule Appomtm 
 
 p. 122. 
 
 No XXL The Aurora, Jan., 1880, p. i22.-The Voce delta Verita, 
 p i2 4 .-Home Rule was started by Mr. D'Israeli, p. i25.-Feniamsm 
 supported by Mr. D'Israeli, p. i 2 6.-Letter from Dublin, Feb. 9, I 
 128 -Col King-Harman, p. 128. Mr. Sullivan's Letter, Oct. 7, 1878, 
 p> I29> _ i^Mimoriale Diplomatique, Feb. 4, 1880, p. 129. -Mr. B 
 and Mr. D'Israeli, p. 130. 
 
 THE MODUS OPERANDI OF THE JESUITS. 
 
 No. XXII. Operations of the Jesuits, p. 131. The Sonderbund 
 War p , 3I Jesuit Writers on Newspaper Staffs, p. 132. Efforts ol 
 the Jesuits p i32.-The Golos and Mr. D'Israeli's Financial Aid to 
 the Jesuits, p. i 33 .-Influence gained over M.P.'s, p. i 33 .-Mr . P 
 Smyth on the Tyranny of Irish Leaders, p. 135. Mr. Butt and Mr. 
 D'Israeli, p. 136. Note from the English Churchman, p. 136. 
 
 THE IRISH PARTY. 
 
 No XXIII The Irish Party and the Priests, p. 138. - 
 Nationalist, p. i 3 8.-And hates England, p. i 3 9--The Ballot and the 
 Irsh Party, p. 140. The Priests smother their Convictions, p. 141.- 
 The Priests in the Van of the Revolution, p. 142. The Fenians 
 anathematized by the Pope and blessed by the Bishops, p. 143. 
 
 No XXIV Character of the Irish, p. 144. Lord O'Hagan's Act, 
 p 144 -Registration of Voters Bill, p. 144. Mr. Gladstone drops the 
 Constabulary Bill, p. i45--Mr. Gladstone refuses to put down Rebel-
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 lion, p. 146. The Registration Bill Transformed, p. 147. Parnell at 
 the 'Dublin Banquet, p. 147. Messrs. Davitt, Sexton, and Healy, 
 
 p. 147- 
 
 THE REFORM BILL OF 1885. 
 
 No. XXV. The Reform Bill, p. 148.- Sir C. Dilke, Jan. 22, 1885, 
 p 149 Mr. Goschen, p. 149. Mr. Gladstone, Feb. 28, p. 149 Ad- 
 ditions to the Electorates, p. 150. Mr. Gladstone's Ridiculous Prin- 
 ciple, p. 150. Jerrymandering of Constituencies, p. 151. The Times 
 on Mr. Gladstone, p. 151. Injustice to the Loyalists, p. 152. Mr. 
 Fay, p. 153. 
 
 No XXVI. The Unconstitutional Conference, p. 153. Second 
 Reading of the Reform Bill, Nov. 18, p. 154. Effects of the Redistri- 
 bution, p. 155. Mr. O'Brien, Dec. 16, p. is6.-Mr. McEvoy, Dec. 20, 
 p 156. Mr. L. Courtney, Dec. 20, p. 156. Mr. O'Kelly, Dec. 22, 
 p> i 57 ._Mr. Redmond, Dec. 22, p. 157. Mr. Parnell, Jan. 21, 1886, 
 p 157 ._Effects of the Unconstitutional Conference, p. 159. 
 
 No. XXVII. Mr. Parnell, Jan. 23, 1886, p. 159. The Irish Policy, 
 p 160 The Fenians and the Boer War, p. 160. The Fenians and 
 Kiel's Rebellion, p. i6i.-Sir C. G. Duffy, Jan. 31, 1885, p. i6i.-The 
 Loyalists are Under-represented, p. 161. Sir S. Northcote, Feb. 18, 
 1885, p. 162. Meeting of Ulster Conservatives, p. 163. Loyalists 
 placed under the heel of Traitors, p. 163 Mr. Trevelyan, p. 164. 
 Mr. Campbell-Bannerman, p. i64--Mr. Lewis, p. i64--Mr. Trevelyan 
 at Hawick, p. 165. 
 
 No. XXVIII. Meeting of the Conservative Party, p. 166. The 
 Intrigue to put down the Loyalists in Ireland, and Parliament in 
 England, p. 167. Banquet in Dublin, Aug. 24, p. 169. Mr. Parnell, 
 Aug. 25, p. 171- 
 
 " ENDYMION." 
 
 No. XXIX. Mr. D'Israeli's " Endymion," p. 172. Mr. Gladstone's 
 Opinions of Parliament, p. 176.- Mr. Gladstone, April 29, 1881, p. 177- 
 Jesuit Expectations, p. 177- 
 
 PLOT TO DESTROY REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT. 
 No. XXX. Obstruction in 1879, for passing the Irish University 
 Bill, p. 179. Obstruction in 1878, for passing the Irish Intermediate 
 Education Bill, p. 180. Mr. D'Israeli plays into the hands of the 
 Roman Catholics, p. 181. Mr. Gladstone on Obstruction, 1871, p. 181. 
 Obstruction in 1877, p. 181. Mr. Gladstone in favour of Obstruc- 
 tion, Aug., 1879, p. 182. Sir Stafford Northcote, p. 183. The Con- 
 stitutional, p. 183. The Irish Catholic Party, p. 184.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No XXXI. Order of July 5, 1877, P- i8 4 .-Obstruction on July 3, 
 p. iSs.-Long Sitting of July 31, 1877, P- 185. Long Sitting of July 5, 
 1879, p. 185. Opinion of the Country on Obstruction, p. 186. Mr. 
 Gladstone's Article in favour of Obstruction, p. 1 86. Sir S. Northcote 
 on Obstruction, Sept. 8, 1879, P- i8 7 .-Professor Fawcett on Obstri 
 tion Oct 28, p. 187. Lord Hartington on Obstruction, April 5, i5 
 p. j'gg. Mr. D'Israeli's Obstruction, 1875, p. 190. Mr. D'Israeli's 
 Obstruction, 1876, p. 191. 
 
 No. XXXII. Mr. Bradlaugh, June 23, 1880, p. 192. Sir S. North- 
 cote p 193. Mr. Gladstone, p. 193. Lord Beaconsfield, p. 193.- 
 Mr Gladstone, p. 194. Appeal to the Courts, p. 194. Mr. Bradlaugh, 
 April 26, p. 195. Mr. Gladstone, p. 195. Sir S. Northcote, p. 195. 
 
 No. XXXIII. Standing Order, Feb. 28, 1880, p. 196. Mr. Sul- 
 livan and Mr. Gladstone, p. 197. Mr. O'Donnell, June 14, p. I97-- 
 Mr. Gladstone and Charles II., p. igS.-Sir W. Harcourt and Captain 
 Price, p. 198. Mr. Forster, p. 198. Lord Hartington, p. 199. Mr. 
 O'Shaughnessy, etc., p. 199. Mr. Gladstone's Piteous Appeal, p. 200. 
 Sir S. Northcote, p. 201. Mr. Forster, p. 201. Lord Granville. 
 The Stuarts, p. 202. 
 
 No XXXIV. Jan. 6, 1881, p. 203. Mr. Gladstone renews Obstruc- 
 tion, Jan. 28, p. 20 3 .-Long Sitting of Jan. 31, p. 2O4.-The Coup 
 d'Etat, p. 207. Urgency, p. 207. Speaker Brand's Decisions, p. 2< 
 The Univers and Intransigeant, p. 209. Cardinal Manning, p. 209. 
 Cardinal Manning on Bradlaugh and Broadhurst, p. 210. 
 
 No. XXXV. Lord Beaconsfield, Mar. 5, p. 211. A Permanent 
 Official on the Destruction of the House of Commons, p. 211. The 
 Irish M.P.'s "named," p. 212. Mr. Gladstone's Labour Pains, p. 214. 
 The Speaker's new Rules, p. 216. Mr. Shaw, p. 217. 
 
 No. XXXVI. Meeting at the Carlton, p. 218. Sir S. Northcote, 
 p 219. Is Mr. Gladstone a Liberal? p. 220. Mr. Speaker stops all 
 Debate, p. 221. Urgency in Supply, p. 221. Party Government, 
 p. 223 Mr. Gladstone, p. 225. Sir S. Northcote, p. 225. Mr. Glad- 
 stone, Mar. 7, p. 226. Joe Cowen, p. 227. 
 
 No. XXXVII. Mr. Gladstone, Mar. 8, p. 227. Mr. O'Donnell, 
 p. 228. The Speaker's Liberal Views, p. 229 The Speaker puts down 
 Debate, p. 229. Urgency in Supply, although there was no Obstruc- 
 tion, p.' 231. The Speaker's new Rules for Urgency, p. 232. Mr. 
 Speaker is an Autocrat, p. 233. Complicity of Mr. Gladstone and Sir 
 S. Northcote, p. 235. Mr. Gladstone does the " absolutely impossible," 
 p. 236.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No. XXXVIII. Defeat of Urgency in Supply, p. 238. The Seda- 
 tive Process, p. 239. Circles within Circles, and Aids to the Irish 
 Party in the Conspiracy, p. 240. Speaker Brand and Home Rule, 
 May 22, p. 242. Mr. McCarthy's vote of Censure, p. 243. The Irish 
 Secretary, p. 243. The Ministry caused this state of things, p. 244. 
 The Times accuses Mr. Gladstone, p. 245. 
 
 No. XXXIX. The Irish Party and its Action, p. 245. Mr. Glad- 
 stone and Sir S. Northcote, June, 1881, p. 246. Mr. Gladstone, Aug. 
 7, 1 88 1, p. 247. Lord Hartington, p. 248. Mr. Bright, p. 249. 
 
 No. XL. Remarks on the above Speeches, p. 250. Mr. Gladstone, 
 Aug. 18, p. 252. The Aim of the Obstructionists, p. 253. The Times 
 affirms a " Conspiracy," Aug. 26, p. 253. The Queen's Speech, p. 254. 
 Sir S. Northcote's Warning, p. 255. Mr. Shaw-Lefevre, p. 255. Mr. 
 Gladstone at Leeds, Oct. 7, p. 255. Sir S. Northcote at Newcastle, 
 p. 255. Mr. Gladstone aims at Home Rule, Oct. 13, p. 256. Mr. 
 Gladstone, Nov. 9, 1881, p. 258. Sir R. Cross, Nov. 15, p. 259. 
 
 No. XLI. Lord Hartington, Dec. 18, p. 260. Mr. Gladstone's 
 Letter, Dec. 28, p. 263. Mr. Chamberlain, Jan. 5, 1882, p. 264. Re- 
 marks on the Cloture, p. 267. Mr. Gladstone, Jan. 13, p. 270. 
 
 No. XLII. Aim of the Government, Jan. 18, 1882, p. 271. Sir W. 
 Harcourt, Jan. 22, p. 272. Daily News on the Cabinet, Jan. 25, p. 275. 
 Mr. Cowen, M.P., Jan. 28, p. 276. Viscount Sherbrooke, p. 277. 
 Mr. W. H. Smith, Jan. 30, p. 278. Sir C. Dilke, Jan. 31, p. 278. 
 The Speaker, p. 279. The Times, Feb. 7, p. 281. 
 
 No. XLII I. Mr. Gladstone's Motion on the Cldture, p. 281. How 
 it affects the House, p. 282. Mr. O'Donnell's Letter, p. 286. National 
 Liberal Federation, p. 287. Mr. J. Cowen, M.P., p. 289. The Lords' 
 Committee on the Land Act, p. 291. Mr. Gladstone and Lord Gran- 
 ville, Feb. 20, p. 291. Mr. Gladstone's Aims, p. 293. 
 
 No. XLIV. Amended Cloture Resolution, p. 294. Mr. Gladstone's 
 Speech, p. 295. Sir S. Northcote, p. 299. The Future Revolution, 
 p- 300. Mr. Peter Taylor, p. 301. Mr. Auberon Herbert, p. 301. 
 Another Liberal M.P., Feb. 24, p. 303. Sir S. Northcote, Feb. 27, 
 p 304. Sir W. Barttelot, p. 305. Mr. O'Donnell, p. 305. The Situa- 
 tion, Mar. I, p. 306. 
 
 No. XLV. Mr. Gladstone refuses to allow Mr. Forster to be ex- 
 amined by the Lords, p. 309. Administration of the Land Act, p. 310. 
 Debate in the House of Commons, p. 313. The Times perceives 
 the Ulterior Aim, p. 314. Address on the Cloture, p. 315.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No XLVI. Mr. Childers, p. 316. Mr. Cowen's Proposal, and Mr. 
 Gladstone's Refusal, p. 3 i 7 .-Mr. O'Donnell, p. 3 i8.-Irish 
 tion, p. 318. Mr. Anderson's Proposal, p. 3 i9--Urgency in Supply, 
 p. 319. Mr. Marriott beguiled, p. 321. 
 
 No XLVII. Defeat of Mr. Marriott, p. 323. Mr. Gladstone 
 again'st Cttture, Febr. 7, 1880, p. 3 24--Mr. Gladstone imposes t 
 Cttture, p. 3 2 4 .-Mr. O'Donnell charges him with having created 
 Obstruction for a purpose, p. 3 2 4 .-Privy Council, when not flooded 
 with Romanists, p. 3 2 5 .-Mr. Gladstone's Difficulties, JT*^, May 8, 
 p 326 -The Worlds Warning, June 7, p, 326.-The Times, Jl 
 and Mr. Gladstone's Reply, p. 3 2 7 .-The St. James's Gazette charges 
 Mr. Gladstone with having created the Obstruction, p. 328. 
 
 No XLVIII. Mr. Gladstone enumerates an immense amount of 
 Business, p. 3 2 9 .^Grand Committees, p. 3 3o.-Mr W H Sn 
 tects Mr. Gladstone, p. 33 i.-The Times, June 21, and Mr. Gladstone 
 ulterior Aims, p. 332.-The Morning Advertiser detects Mr. C 
 stone, p. 333- 
 
 No XLIX. All-night Sitting arranged by Government, p. 334-- 
 was deliberately planned, p. 33S- Mr. Healy's Letter p. 33 6.- 
 Government gave notices of Amendments, p. 337--No Obstruct! 
 yet a prepared List of M.P.'s suspended, p. 33 8 - 
 
 No L. Application of the Speaker's Definition of Obstruction, p. 
 339.-Mr. Gladstone's Urgency of July 4, p. ^.-Declaration o 
 Irish p 341. Sixty new Amendments by Government, p. 342.- 
 Speaker Brand on Urgency, p. 3 43--Mr. E. P. Bouverie, p. 343--Mr. 
 Gladstone's Announcement, p. 344--Sir C. Gavan Duffy, July 14, 
 p- 344. Mr. Gladstone and Home Rule, p, 346. 
 
 No LI Mr. Gladstone's Speech, Aug. 9, 1882, p. 346. Mr. Glad- 
 stone's Statement, p. 3 47--Grand Committees, Times, Sept. 28, p. 348. 
 -Meetin- of Parliament in October,.?. 349--The Times perceives 
 the extreme Aims of Mr. Gladstone, p. 350.- Why additional Seats 
 were secured to the Irish Nationalists, p. 551. Mr. Gladstone, Oct. 
 , 5I _ S ir S. Northcote, Oct. 27, p. y>\.Moniteur de Rome, 
 % 52 Complicity between the Leaders of both Parties, Times, 
 Oct. 30, p. 352. Mr. Gladstone not a Whole Man, p. 353. 
 
 No LII Cloture enacted, p. 354. Parnell's Views, p. 354-- 
 Terms of the Treaty with the Irish, p. 3S5--Mr. Gladstone on t 
 Rule, Nov. 7 , p. 3 56.-O P inions of various Journals, p. 3$&- 
 Cowen's Speech, p. 3 S8.-Lord R. Churchill, p. ^.-Cloiure, Mr. 
 Gladstone and his further Projects ; Moniteur de Rome, Nov. 10, 
 p< 360. Mr. Gladstone was an Instrument, p. 360.
 
 CONTENTS. xvu 
 
 No. LIII. The Irish seek to sow Dissensions, p. 361. Lord R. 
 Churchill shows that Mr. D'Israeli hampered Liberty of Speech, 
 p. 362. Mr. Gladstone, p. 362. Lord J. Manners, p. 363. Mr. 
 Raikes, p. 363. Work of the Session, p. 364. Destruction of t. 
 House of Commons by both Parties, p. 364. Lord R. Churchill, 
 Nov. 26, p. ^.Momteur de Rome, Jan. 18, 1883, p. 365 Mr. 
 Lowell, Jan. 31, 1883, p. 3 65.-The New National Party. Moniteur 
 de Rome, p. 366. Both Parties have been broken up, p. 367. Lord 
 Granville and Mr. Gladstone, May 2, p. 367. 
 
 No. LIV. Lord R. Churchill and the Fourth Party, p. 368. Mr. 
 Bright accuses the Conservatives, p. 369. Sir S. Northcote's reply, 
 p. 370. Mr. Bright's Rejoinder, June 18, p. 370. Postponement of the 
 Irish Estimates, p. 371. The general Disorganization, p. 371. 
 Obstruction to aid the Irish Registration Bill, p. 372. Mr. Glad- 
 stone's "Drastic Proposals," p. 372. The two Parties are broken 
 up, p. 373. Adjournment, on Dec. 6, contrary to the Rules of the 
 House, p. 373. The Speaker exerts the Cloture, p. 374 Parnell's 
 Accusations of the Conservatives, p. 375. Debate of Feb. 27, 1885 ; 
 O'Brien's Suspension, p. 375. Disregard of the Rules of the House, 
 p- 376. Mr. Gladstone drops the Mask, May 19, p. 377. 
 
 THE CONSPIRACY IN IRELAND. 
 
 No. LV. Is Rome a great moral Power? p. 377. The Priests 
 lead the popular Movements, p. 378. Sir S. Northcote might have 
 stopped the Agitation, p. 378. Mr. Butt's double Game, p. 379. The 
 Constitution suspended in Ireland, p. 379. The R. C. Bishops and 
 the Fenians, p. 380. Ireland is always a Trouble, p. 381. Father 
 Cathrein, S.J., p. 381. The Jesuits and Devoy, p. 382. 
 
 No. LVI. Devoy's Letter, p. 383. Ulster Home Government 
 Association and Mr. Parnell, Feb. 10, 1879, p. 386. Biggar, March 3, 
 1879, p. 386. Brennan, June 15, 1879, p. 387. Davitt, June 15, 1879, 
 p 387. Repeal of the Irish Convention Act, p. 388. Meeting at Clare- 
 morris, July 13, 1879, P- 388. Ennis Election, p. 389. Davitt at 
 Shrule, p. 389. Parnell at Limerick, Aug. 31, p. 389. O'Connor Power, 
 p. 389. Biggar, Sept. 5, p. 390. 
 
 No. LVI I. Parnell, Sept. 12, p. 390. Parnell and Dillon, Oct. 5, 
 p- 3 9 i._Westmeath Manifesto, p. 391. Parnell, Power, and Davitt, 
 Oct. 12, p. 392. Parnell's Advice, Oct. 16, p. 393. Davitt, Oct. 19, 
 p 393. Land League instituted, Oct. 21, p. 394. Parnell and Davitt, 
 Nov. 2, p. 394. Operations in England, p. 396. Arrest of Davitt, 
 Daly, and Killen, p. 396. Brennan, Nov. 23, p. 396. Arrest of 
 Brennan, p. 397. Parnell at Liverpool, p. 397. Devoy and the 
 Fenians ; Agreement with Parnell, p. 397. Egan's Letter, p. 397.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No. LVIII. Parnell and Dillon go to America, Dec. 21, 1879. 
 p. 398. Parnell at Pittsburgh, p. 398. Parnell, Feb. 16, 1880, p. 398. 
 Parnell at Cincinnati, Feb. 23, p. 398. Biggar on Hartman, March 
 15, p. 399. The Fanfulla and the Pope's Circular, p. 399. Arch- 
 bishop McCabe's Pastoral, p. 400. Bishop Vaughan, March 9, 1880, 
 p. 401. Bishop Bagshawe's Pastoral, p. 401. Popish Bishops and 
 Priests, p. 404. Mr. Gladstone's Letter to Mr. Fergusson, p. 404. 
 
 No. LIX. Burke's Opinion, p. 405. Mr. D'Israeli in 1867, p. 405. 
 Lord Beaconsfield's Manifesto, 1880, p. 405. Mr. Gladstone on 
 Ireland, 1880, p. 405. Lapsing of the Coercion Act, p. 406 The 
 Disturbance Bill, p. 406. Mr. Gladstone and Parnell, p. 406. Mr. 
 Gladstone, April 4, 1882, p. 406. The like Agitation before 1869, 
 p. &p-iCiviltd, Cattolica, April 3, 1880, p. 407. Relief of Distress, 
 and Disturbance Bills, p. 408. Attorney-General's Amendment, and 
 Mr. Gladstone's ditto, July 12, p. 408. Justice Lawson's Charge, 
 p. 409. The Aurora, Nov. 1880, p. 410. Archbishop Croke's Letter 
 from Rome, p. 410. The Aurora, p. 410. The Sunday Agitations, 
 p. 411. Arnold Ruge, Dec. 8, 1880, p. 411. 
 
 No. LX. The Standard accuses Mr. Gladstone of causing the 
 Agitation, p. 412. Lord Salisbury, Nov. 2, 1880, also does so, p. 412. 
 Again, on May 30, 1881, p. 414. Land League Law in the place of 
 the Queen's Law, p. 416. The State of the Country, Dec. 22, 1880, 
 p. 417. 
 
 No. LXI. ParnelPs Trial and Acquittal, p. 418. The Times lays 
 the blame on Mr. Gladstone, p. 419. Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Bright, 
 p. 420. The Solicitor-General, Jan. 10, 1881, p. 420. Mr. Forster, 
 Jan. 24, p. 421. Resolutions of the R. C. Bishops, p. 421. Bishop 
 Nulty's Pastoral, pp. 422, 423. Other Resolutions of the R. C. Bishops, 
 p. 424. The Queen's Speech and ParnelFs Speech, 424. 
 
 No. LXI I. New York Land League Meeting, p. 425. Parnell's 
 Letter, Feb. 13, 1881, p. 426. Parnell, Hugo, and Rochefort, p. 426. 
 Criticism of the R. C. Bishops, p. 427. Sir W. Harcourt, Feb. 22, 
 p. 428. Archbishop McCabe, p. 428. Archbishop Croke, p. 428. 
 Ladies' Land League, p. 429. Sullivan and Archbishop Croke, p. 429. 
 Introduction of the Land Bill, p. 430. Mr. Gibson, Mr. Gladstone, 
 and Sir W. Harcourt, p. 431. Declaration by R. C. Bishops, April 28, 
 p. 432. Dillon's Demand, May 4, p. 432. Affection of the Govern- 
 ment for the Land League, p. 433. Avowed Aim of the Land League, 
 p. 433. Archbishop Croke's Eulogy on Dillon, p. 434. Archbishop 
 Croke's Speech, June I, p. 434. The Meaning of the Speech, p. 435.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 The Times on the Civil War, p. 435. Archbishop Croke's Speech at 
 Holycross, p. 436. Mr. Gladstone opposes the Irish Government, 
 P- 436. 
 
 No. LXIII. Parnell exhorts the Government to obey Archbishop 
 Croke, p. 437. Mr. Gladstone on Evictions, p. 437. Archbishop 
 Croke's Counsel, p. 438. Deputation to Cardinal Manning, p. 438. 
 Manning's Speech, p. 439. Manning a Land Leaguer, p. 439. Mr. 
 Gladstone's Rewards to the Land Leaguers, p. 439. Civilta Cattolica^ 
 Sept. 17, 1881, p. 440. National Convention in Dublin, p. 441. 
 Attitude of the Priests, p. 441. Irish Convention in New York, p. 442. 
 Boycotting and Sectarianism, p. 443. Theories as to Land, p. 443. 
 
 No. LXIV. Increased Lawlessness, p. 445. The Land League 
 abhorred by the Irish, p. 446. The State of Ireland, Times, Sept. 
 26, 1 88 1, p. 446. Parnell avows his Aim, p. 447. Parnell on "A Fair 
 "Rent," p. 448. Parnell declares his Aim, p. 448. Priest Sheehy's 
 Speech, p. 449. Maynooth Resolutions, p. 449. Speeches by O'Don- 
 nell and R. Power, p. 450. Mr. Gladstone had fostered the Anarchy, 
 p. 450. Mr. Gladstone in League with Parnell, p. 451. Mr. Glad- 
 stone's Speech at Leeds, p. 452. The Irish wonder at what they sup- 
 pose to be the Apathy of the Government, 453. 
 
 No. LXV. Archbishop Croke at Thurles and Parnell at Wexford, 
 p. 454. Dillon, Oct. II, p. 455. The Univers, p. 456. Arrest of 
 Parnell, p. 456. Speeches by Priests, p. 457. Desired Cohesion given 
 to the League, p. 457. Parnell interviewed, p. 458. The Comforts of 
 Parnell and the Leaguers in Prison, p. 458. The Rotunda Meeting, 
 p. 459. The American Press, p. 459. The Univers, p. 460. 
 
 No. LXVI. The Kilmainham Manifesto, p. 462. Complicity of 
 the Government, p. 463. Priest CantwelPs Speech, p. 463. The 
 League proclaimed, Oct. 20, 464. Rosary Sunday, Oct. 2, p. 465. 
 
 
 No. LXVII. Opening of Justice O'Hagan's Court, p. 466. M'Ata- 
 vey's Case, p. 467. Commissioner Baldwin, p. 467. The Com- 
 missioners ruin the Landlords, p. 468. Mr. Chamberlain, Oct. 26, 
 p. 468. The State of Ireland, p. 469. Mr. Chamberlain's Principles, 
 p 470. Mr. Gladstone at Knowsley on " Rapine," p. 470. The Land 
 Act, p. 471. O'Donnell's First Letter, p. 472. O'Donnell's Second 
 Letter, p. 472. 
 
 No. LXVI 1 1. Mr. Gladstone's Policy in stopping the Payment of 
 any Rents, p. 473. Land League Manifesto, p. 473. Mr. Gladstone, 
 Nov. 9, p. 474. Was Mr. Gladstone a Failure ? p. 475. Lord Salis- 
 bury on Mr. Gladstone's Complicity, Nov. 13, p. 475. Archbishop
 
 _______ . - 
 
 Croke's Speech p. 47 7.-The Unjust Steward, p. 4 77.-Agitation 
 
 
 What was the Plan ? p. 4 8..-Archbishop Croke thereupon, p. 482 
 
 Mr. Shaw's Letter, p. 482. 
 
 No. LXIX. The Jesuit Union, p. 48 3 .-Mr. Gladstone, April j , .88 1 
 ,Ri "RkhoD Nulty's Communistic Letter, p. 484- 
 
 Carnarvon, p. 489 - The Duke of Argy11 ' P> 49 ' 
 
 No. LXX. Mr. Chamberlain on the Land Act, p. 49^-Mr. Cham- 
 berlain on Government, and the Independence of Ireland p. 493.- 
 M Chamberlain on Revenge on the Landlords, p. 494-Mr. Bright 
 M n r the RevSution in iSZ P- 495.-Ju.tice OjHagaM De cisions, 
 p. 497 .-Archbishop Croke's Speech, p. -** ''" 
 
 H-e 
 
 Gladstone, Feb. 9 , :8S 2 , p. J^ 
 Challenges to Mr. Gladstone, p. 57- 
 
 No LXXI. Sexton on the Land Act, p. 507. -Cost of the Land 
 
 * _ C7 , Happiness of the Rebels in Prison, p. SH- 
 sSe o^ I^eS^ SiS^M, Smith's Notice, p. 51 6.-Mr. Gladstone's 
 despondent Speech, April 4, 1882, p. 517. 
 
 No LXXII. Lord Salisbury, April 12, p. 519.-^ S. Northcote 
 p ^".-Increase of Outrages, p. 52 5 .-Indignant Letter o a Roman 
 c'atho lie April 14, p. 5 26.-Lord Salisbury, April 13, P- S^-Lord 
 sSbu ry d'cover's'he Plot, p. 5 2 8. -Tenant-right worth more than 
 the Fee-'imple, p. 530-The Landlords' Position, p. S3I-O Connor 
 Power, April 20, p. 531. 
 
 Telegram, p. 537--Mr. Forster's Statement, May 4, P- 537- 
 Gladstone's Reply, p. 539--Mr. Parnell, p. 539-
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No. LXXIV. Mr. Gladstone's Real and Apparent Policy, p. 540. 
 Rejoicings in Dublin, p. 541. The Irish World, p. 542. Lord Spen- 
 cer and Lord F. Cavendish, p. 542. Account of the Murder, p. 543. 
 The French Journals, p. 545. Mr. Forster displaced by Intrigues in 
 the Cabinet, p. 547. Resolutions on the Murder, p. 548. Mr. Smith 
 on May 6, p. 549. 
 
 No. LXXV. Opinions in Paris, p. 551. Complicity of Mr. Glad- 
 stone and the League, p. 553. Mr. O'DonnelFs Letter, May 8, p. 553. 
 Messrs. Gladstone, Bright, and Chamberlain are hissed, p. 555. 
 Sir W. Harcourt's Precautions, p. 555. Davitt's Interview by Night 
 with Mr. Gladstone, and Mission to Paris, p. 556. Atrocious Publica- 
 tion in Paris, p. 556. Challenge of the Times, p. 557. Miss Anna 
 Parnell, p. 557. Mr. Gladstone reserves Irish Affairs to himself, 
 p. 558. The Golos on the Murders, p. 558. 
 
 No. LXXVI. Mr. Gladstone will not change, p. 559. National 
 Association of Ireland, p. 560. The Resolutions passed to Order, 
 p. 56^. Davitt's Letter, p. 562. Opinions of various Journals, p. 564. 
 Mr. Redmond's Question, p. 567. Archbishop Croke on the Mur- 
 ders, p. 568. 
 
 No. LXXVI I. The Kilmainham Treaty, p. 570. Sheridan, p. 575. 
 Davitt, p. 576. Mr. Gladstone's Excuses, p. 577. Mr. Forster not 
 trusted to Reply, p. 578. The Arrears Bill and Mr. Redmond's Bill, 
 P- 579- 
 
 No. LXXVI 1 1. Cardinal McCabe's Return, p. 580. Archbishop 
 Croke, p. 580. The Dean of Peterborough's Letter, p. 581. The 
 Fenian Manifesto, p. 581. Davitt's Speech, May 22, 1882, p. 582. It 
 was a repudiation of the Kilmainham Treaty, p. 582. All Rents 
 stopped, p. 583. Mr. Gladstone's Conduct, p. 584. Mr. Childers' 
 Admission, p. 585. 
 
 No. LXXIX. Dillon's Speech on Boycotting and Murder, p. 587. 
 Mr. Gladstone's Reply, p. 588. Mr. Forster's Explanation, p. 590. 
 Lord Salisbury, at Stratford, charges Mr. Gladstone as the Cause of 
 all, p. 591. The Times accuses Mr. Gladstone, p. 594. Davitt's 
 Letter to Bishop Nulty, p. 595. Sir R. Cross accuses Mr. Gladstone, 
 P- 595- 
 
 No. LXXX. The Jesuit Univers supports Communism and Crime, 
 p. 597. The Social Democrat Resolutions, p. 597. Mr. Smith's Accu- 
 sation of Mr. Gladstone, p. 597. Mr. Herbert declares Gladstone 
 and Parnell to be Slaves of a secret Power, p. 598. The Aim, accord- 
 ding to the Jesuit Catholic Progress, p. 599. R. C. Appointments
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 by Mr. Gladstone, p. 600. Davitt's Speech on Nationalisation of 
 Land, p. 600. Lord Cowper's Speech, p. 601. Lord Salisbury's 
 Speech, p. 602. 
 
 No. LXXXI. The Dominicans, p. 603. Manifesto of the R. C. 
 Bishops, June 12, p. 604. Effect in Ireland, p. 605. The Journal de 
 Rome excuses the Manifesto, p. 605. Mr. D'Israeli sold Arms to the 
 Irish Rebels, p. 606. Mr. Childers' Explanation, p. 609. Cardinal 
 McCabe's Pastoral, p. 610. The Journal de Rome on Sir S. North- 
 cote, p. 610. Lord Clanricarde's Letter, p. 6n.-Mr. Gladstone's 
 Remarks on it, p. 612. Mr. Gladstone disestablishes Mr. Vernon, p. 
 612. 
 
 No. LXXXI I. Importation of Bloodhounds, p. 613. Mr. Glad- 
 stone's sudden Concession in the Crimes Bill, p. 613. This done con- 
 trary to the Cabinet, p. 614. Journal de Rome, Aug. 2, 1882, asserted 
 that Lord F. Cavendish was sent to inaugurate Home Rule, p. 615. 
 Conference of Athenry, p. 616. Davitt at Wexford, p. 617. The 
 Moniteur de Rome links Davitt and Gladstone, p. 617. 
 
 No. LXXXIII. The National Conference, p. 619. Mr. Gladstone 
 was in the Secret, p. 621. Famine of the R. C. University, p. 622.- 
 The State of Protestant and R. C. Church compared, p. 623. Anxiety 
 of the Pope, p. 624. 
 
 No. LXXXIV. The Pope's Encyclical on St. Francis, and on 
 Daring, p. 625. Curiously ignored by the Papal Journals, p. 625.- 
 Fruits of the Encyclical appear in Crimes, p. 626. Davitt's and Dr. 
 Nuhys Speeches, p. 627. Redmond's Speech, Nov. 21, p. 628. Mr. 
 Gladstone refuses to define " Fair Rents," p. 629. -All the Agitations in 
 Ireland are Papal, p. 629. Mr. Trevelyan on the incendiary Speeches, 
 p. 630. Mock Trial of Davitt and Healy, p. 630. Parnell's Speech 
 on the Land League, p. 631. Davitt's Speech on the Land Agitation 
 and Home Rule, p. 631. Biggar's Speech, p. 632. Davitt's Speech, 
 Dec. 22, 1882, p. 632 ; Dec. 24, 1882, p. 633 ; Dec. 28, 1882, p. 634 ; 
 Jan. 4, 1883, p. 635 ; Jan. 10, p. 635 ; Jan. 12, 1883,?. 635. O'Brien is 
 tried and stands for Mallow, p. 636. 
 
 No. LXXXV. Mr. Forster's Speech, Dec. 16, 1882, p. 637. Journal 
 de Rome on the " victorious struggles " of Ireland and Poland, p. 639. 
 The pious Desires of the Jesuit Society, p. 640. The Pope's Brief, 
 Jan. 23, 1883, p. 640. Not published by the Pope's Journals, nor 
 regarded in Ireland, p. 641. The Conduct of the R. C. Priests, 
 p. 641. Parnell foretold the Effect of the Land Bill in 1879, P- 642. 
 .Mr. Gladstone and Ministers foretold it incorrectly in 1881, p. 643. 
 Its real Effects, p. 643.
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 No. LXXXVI. Similar Agitation in India, p. 644. R. C. Priests 
 procured false Declarations of Innocence from Criminals, p. 645. 
 Davitt's Declaration, Feb. 7, 1883, p. 645. Lord Cranbrooke, Feb. 9, 
 p. 646. Mr. Trevelyan, Feb. 9, p. 648. Conciliation the Result of 
 Credulity and Malice, p. 649. Mr. Gladstone pelting Sugar-plums, p. 
 650. Detectives to protect Ministers, p. 650. Mr. Gladstone at 
 Cannes, p. 650. Mr. Trevelyan on the Land League, p. 651. Lord 
 Salisbury, Feb. 15, p. 651. Discoveries by the Detectives, p. 652. 
 Jesuits, Fenians, and the Ribbon Society, p. 653. Carey, Brennan, 
 Sheridan, and Parnell, p. 653. Mr. O'Donnell, p. 654. Captain Me 
 Cafferty and Lord Beaconsfield, p. 654. 
 
 No. LXXXVII. The Univers on Byrne's Arrest, p. 655. The 
 Voltaire on the Irish Party, p. 655. False Declarations of Innocence, 
 p. 656. Irish Borough Franchise Bill, p. 656. The emeute in Paris, 
 March 10, and the Explosions in London, March 15, p. 657. The 
 Daily Express accuses Mr. Gladstone, p. 658. Archbishop Croke 
 and the other Bishops, p. 658. Mr. Smith, March 26, p. 659. Arrest 
 of Whitehead, p. 66 1. The Irish Wortd,andthe Nation, p. 662. 
 Connection between Fenians and Romanism, p. 663. Threat of the 
 Journal de Rome, p. 664. 
 
 No. LXXXVI 1 1. The Irish Convention, April 26, p. 665. Indig- 
 nation of the New York Times, p. 666. Russia's Complicity, p. 667. 
 Policy of the Jesuits, p. 667. Mr. Errington, p. 668. R. C. Priests 
 on Balinacurra Racecourse, p. 669. The Pope's Encyclical, May 
 II, p. 669. Archbishop Croke goes to Rome, p. 670. The Irish and 
 the Encyclical, p. 671. The Pope's most secret Encyclical (also 
 May 11), to the R. C. Bishops, p. 672. Its Effects in promoting the 
 Agitation, p. 673. 
 
 No. LXXXIX. The Concession of Government, p. 673. Lord 
 Salisbury predicts Home Rule, Oct. 30, p. 674. Davitt's Letter to the 
 Canadians, p. 674. Irish Education handed over to the Jesuits, p. 
 675. Fenian Character of Romanism, p. 675. The Government en- 
 courage Nationalist, and put down Loyalist Meetings, p. 676. The 
 Hon. Col. Knox, p. 677. The Government order the Loyalists to be 
 attacked, p. 677. The Effect of Concessions to Romanism, p. 678. 
 The Pope identifies himself with the Revolution, p. 679. Davitt at 
 Newport and Clonmel, p. 679. Monsignor Corcoran, p. 680. The 
 Pope's Journal advocates the Murder of the Jury which tried O'Don- 
 nell, p. 680. Lord Allington and the false Professions of Innocence, 
 p. 680. 
 
 No. XC. The Ruin of Landowners, p. 681. Rev. Prof. Hogan and 
 Mr. Gladstone, p. 68 1. Tynan, or " No. i," and Mr. Gladstone, p. 682.
 
 xxiv CONTENTS. 
 
 Mr. Trevelyan and the Depreciation of Land, p. 682. Mr. Gray 
 and " Fair Rent," p. 682. The National Meeting at Newry, p. 683.- 
 The Duke of Argyll, p. 683. Ultramontanism and Revolution, p. 684. 
 The Maamtrasna Case re-opened, p. 684. Other false Declarations, 
 p. 685. Mr. Onslow on the Land League Courts, p. 685. The Rev. 
 Michael Duggan, p. 686. Parnell at Miltown Malbay, p. 687 
 W. Redmond, Feb. 3, 1885, p. 687. Papal Sympathy with Revolu- 
 tion, p. 688. The Bull Urbem Antibarem, p. 688. Bismarck and 
 Papal Revolutions, p. 689. The Irish Revolution and Mr. Gladstone, 
 p. 689. 
 
 No. XCI. Mr. Errington's Mission, p. 689. The Law against a 
 Mission to the Pope, p. 693. Mr. Errington's Mission, p. 693. The 
 Pope governs the British Empire, p. 695. 
 
 No. XCI I. Cardinal Howard and Monsignor Stonor, p. 696. The 
 Bishops and Priests of Ireland join heartily the Revolution, p. 697. 
 The Pope's Letter to the Queen, p. 697. Cardinal McCabe's Des- 
 patches, 698. Cardinals Manning and Howard, p. 698. Davitt 
 against Errington, p. 699. The Pope requires the Queen to abdicate 
 her Supremacy and put down the English Church, p. 700. Dr. 
 Badenoch, 700. Cardinal McCabe the Nuncio to Ireland, p. 701.- 
 Negotiations with the Pope for the Government of Ireland, p. 703. 
 
 No. XCIII. The Question of Emigration determined in the Vatican 
 for Ireland, p. 704. Priest Redmond, D.D., warns the Pope, p. 704. 
 Beaconsfield and Gladstone laboured for an Anglo-Papal Alliance, 
 p. 706. Dr. Walsh and Dr. Donnelly, p. 707. The Queen forbidden 
 to hold Communication with the Pope, p. 707. Conclusion, p. 708.
 
 No. I. 
 
 WHEN Napoleon III. took Chablis and Faucigny, I 
 happened to be reading the Political Testament of Cardinal 
 Alberoni. There I came upon a report, by that statesman, 
 of a plan which the French king entertained, for seizing 
 those very Provinces ; the reason for desiring them ; and 
 the steps which must be followed in order to make the 
 seizure successful. I was astounded at finding Napoleon 
 had followed the old plan in all its details ; and I mentioned 
 the circumstance to Mr. D'Israeli. Mr. D'Israeli answered, 
 " Of course ! All such plans are kept in the archives of 
 "the various Foreign Offices, until circumstances occur 
 "which are favourable to their realization." As the con- 
 figuration of the ground remains the same ; as the position 
 of the towns and cities is unaltered ; as the character and 
 condition of the inhabitants differ but little in the lapse of 
 centuries, the reasons in favour of those political plans, 
 and even the details of them, remain unchanged. Thus 
 it is that the political prophet is merely one who is 
 acquainted with all such plans, by different Governments, 
 which have ever been devised in the past. 
 
 In the same way the schemes of the Russians in the 
 north, in the Balkan Provinces, and in Eastern Asia, were 
 all laid down in the will of Peter the Great ; and have 
 been developed in detail by various Russian statesmen, in 
 the memoirs they have addressed to the Czar, since that 
 date. A similar realization has occurred in our day. Mr. 
 Gladstone has been realizing the policy of Tyrconnel, in 
 Ireland. It was the old policy of the Jesuit party, which 
 Tyrconnel carried out. Tyrconnel was Lord Lieutenant
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 of Ireland, under King James II. His nick-name was 
 "Lying Dick Talbot " (Macaulay : Hist. II., p. 144). He 
 " swore savagely at the Act of Settlement, and called the 
 "English interest a foul thing, a roguish thing, and a 
 " damned thing," while he " at first pretended to be con- 
 vinced that the distribution of property could not, after 
 " the lapse of so many years, be altered." Gradually, how- 
 ever, he took another tone, and tried to persuade the 
 Council to deprive the English Protestant landowners of 
 their property, and place it again in Catholic hands. In 
 making a progress through Ireland, he found to his sur- 
 prise, that the Roman Catholic secular priests " exhorted 
 "their congregations to withhold from him all marks of 
 " honour." But the Irish peasantry followed the lead of the 
 Jesuits, and crypto-Jesuits, and the Regular priests of the 
 other Orders, and " sang Erse songs in praise of Tyrcon- 
 "nel, who would, they doubted not, soon reappear to 
 "complete the humiliation of their English oppressors? 
 
 Another historian, Armand Carrel, wrote, in 1827, a 
 book on "the Counter- Revolution in England." It was 
 translated into English, and published by Bogue in 1846. 
 Carrel traces the action of Tyrconnel directly to the 
 Jesuits ; and he wrote with the papers of the French 
 Foreign Office at his command. To the Jesuits he ascribes 
 great power, during the reign of James II., because James 
 " never ceased to conspire with them. The orders which 
 " he dictated to the Council, were those which the directors 
 " of his conscience had previously sanctioned ; these were 
 " the true Ministers, who had practical cognisance of all 
 " public affairs, through the obscure medium of their police, 
 "which everywhere superintended and influenced the 
 " authorities, high and low." There was, in fact, " a secret 
 " Government," which overrode the real Government of 
 the country. Even the Courts of Justice were prostituted, 
 and made mere engines of the well-known revenge and 
 spite of the Jesuits against all those who had thwarted 
 their projects, or passed censures on their acts.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 Such a state of things might, in one respect, be more 
 easily brought about in those days than in these. For (as 
 we learn from certain letters, from the Jesuits at Liege to 
 the Jesuits at Fribourg, which had been intercepted in 
 Holland, and sent over to England) James II. had been 
 "received" as a member of the Society of Jesus, and had 
 vowed that the interests of the society should be his one 
 end and aim ; and that he would complete the conversion 
 of the three kingdoms, or else earn a blessed martyrdom 
 in the attempt. Nor was it necessary for him to go abroad 
 every Easter, to make his confession and obtain advice 
 from his Jesuit superiors ; for Jesuits and crypto-Jesuits in 
 plenty had been placed about him ; and he had a Jesuit 
 confessor and " Spiritual Director." 
 
 In 1686 and 1687, Lord Tyrconnel pushed forward, with 
 all the energy of his character, that part of the Jesuits' plan 
 which consisted in turning Ireland into one vast camp. 
 He took the ancient charters from the towns, so that there 
 might be no law in Ireland but such as he approved ; he 
 put an end to the Corporate bodies, and dismissed all the 
 Protestants who had been employed under the Duke of 
 Ormond, or the Earl of Clarendon. By various acts of 
 cruelty, he managed to worry out and extirpate the 
 Protestant landlords, so that he might have at his com- 
 mand a Catholic Ireland to assist King James, if a struggle 
 should ensue between the Catholic throne and Protestant 
 England (Armand Carrel, p. 233). 
 
 In 1687, King James (Macaulay, II., p. 306) entertained, 
 the intention of leaving his crown at the disposal of Louis, 
 the King of France that Louis XIV. who had a Jesuit 
 confessor, and was a willing tool of the Jesuits ; that Louis 
 who could not be got to listen to any complaints from 
 the other side, " because he had so much of (Pere) Coton 
 " in his ears." The original paper, according to Lord 
 Macaulay, exists in the archives of France and Holland, 
 and runs as follows : " Que, quand pour etablir la Re- 
 ligion Catholique et pour la confirmer ici, il (i.e. King
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "James) devroit se rendre en quelque fagon dependant de 
 "la France, et mettre la decision de la succession a la 
 "couronne entre les mains de ce Monarque la ; qu'il seroit 
 "oblige de le faire, parcequ'il vaudroit mieux pour i 
 "sujets qu'ils devinssent vassaux du Roi de France, etant 
 " Catholiques, que de demeurer comme enclaves du Diable " 
 "(Le. Protestants). This paper was "handed about from 
 "Jesuit to Jesuit, and from courtier to courtier, till some 
 "eminent Roman Catholics, in whom bigotry had not 
 " extinguished patriotism, furnished the Dutch ambassador 
 
 " with a copy." 
 
 In the meantime " Tyrconnel had, with his ma 
 "approbation, made arrangements for separating Ireland 
 "from the Empire (an aggravated Home Rule), and 
 "placing her under the protection of Louis, as soon as 
 "the Crown should devolve on a Protestant Sovereign. 
 "Bonrepaux had been consulted, had imparted the design 
 "to his Court, and had been instructed to assure 
 "connel that France would lend effectual aid to the 
 "accomplishment of this great project. Je scay bien 
 " certainement (wrote Bonrepaux) que 1'intention du I 
 " d'Angleterre est de faire perdre ce royaume, 1'Irelande, 
 "a son successeur, et de le fortifier en sorte que tous ses 
 "sujets Catholiques y puissent avoir un asile assure." 
 
 That account was written in 1827, not in iSSi. Tyr- 
 connel proposed it in 1687 ; and Gladstone realized the 
 scheme in 1881. "There was (wrote Carrel, p. 237) a 
 "wholly different system for that country (Ireland) than 
 "for England. The affairs of the Catholics were^ there 
 " so advanced, that it was in immediate contemplation to 
 " destroy what they called the Establishment of Cromwell, 
 "that is to say, the arrangement of property, founded 
 " upon the great Protestant colonisation, which had pacified 
 "the country in 1652, and had held it in check during the 
 "whole reign of Charles II." It was in 1652 that "the 
 " Upas tree of Protestant ascendency," had been planted. 
 In October, 1868, Mr. Gladstone announced his intention
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 5 
 
 to cut off "the three branches of that tree, the Church, 
 " the Education, and the Landlords." The tree flourished 
 till 1869, when that woodman, so fond of the axe, came 
 and hacked at the three branches of the plant which he 
 was pleased to style " a Upas tree ; " because he regarded 
 Protestantism, and every other ism except Ultramontanism, 
 as a poisonous influence. Carrel continues : " The King 
 "thought that at least five years would be necessary to 
 "complete this revolution. Lord Tyrconnel proposed 
 "that, somehow or other, it should be accomplished within 
 " a year ; that then Ireland, wholly separated from England 
 "by religion, should be placed under the protection of 
 "the King of France, so as, whatever happened, to offer 
 "to the Catholics of England an asylum entirely free 
 " from the presence of Protestants." 
 
 No. II. 
 
 I HAVE explained so much of the Jesuit plan as consisted, 
 first, in defrauding Protestant landlords of the ownership 
 of their estates, and handing them over to the Roman 
 Catholic tenants ; and secondly, in attempting to effect 
 the legislative independence of Roman Catholic Ireland. 
 Before applying those facts to the events of our day, I 
 continue the consideration of the Jesuit plans. 
 
 During the latter years of the reign of King Charles II., 
 who was a Roman Catholic, but neither so bigoted nor 
 so hot-headed as James all that James had been able to 
 perform was to get public employments, or commissions in 
 the army, for young men whom he conceived favourable to 
 the Papist cause ; and to push them on to higher and 
 higher posts, so as to increase the wealth and influence of 
 the Roman Catholic party. " Now that he was himself 
 "master," says Armand Carrel, "he saw before him a revo- 
 " lution to be effected. . . . He resolved to raise the 
 " Irish Catholic race from its abasement ; to recruit the
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " English army from among its youth, now grovelling in 
 " ignorance, fanaticism, and misery ; and thus to create for 
 " himself, under the orders of Popish officers, an entirely 
 "national army [so early did the Nationalists appear on 
 "the scene in Ireland !], a powerful reserve for him, should 
 " the English some day become less docile ; he would then 
 "expel from Ireland the proprietors who held their right 
 " from Cromwell, and who formed, in the great towns, a 
 "citizen-class infected, like that of England, with ideas of 
 " political liberty, and still more hostile even than the 
 " latter, to Popery." 
 
 We must not suppose that the persons to whom James 
 confided political places, or high posts in the army, were 
 all Roman Catholics, like the Marquis of Ripon, or Judge 
 Day in our times. There were some who, while Romanists 
 at heart, would have indignantly denied that they were 
 Papists; and who would have betrayed their true character 
 to the vigilant, who observed that they let a Popish con- 
 spirator escape at a critical moment, when they might have 
 brought him to justice ; or perceived that they conducted 
 a cause in the law courts in such a way that justice should 
 be wrested, in order to give vast riches to some adherent 
 of the Roman Catholic cause. 
 
 Nor was it always advantageous to James to appoint 
 Roman Catholics, whenever he could obtain professing 
 Protestants whom he could manipulate and get to "roll 
 the log" for the Papists. He replaced the Duke of Or- 
 mond by the Earl of Clarendon in the Lord Lieutenancy 
 of Ireland. " He did not, however, confide his projects to 
 " Clarendon ; he rather, indeed, made use of him to con- 
 " ceal them ; for the attachment of the Earl of Clarendon 
 " to the Anglican religion being well known, his nomina- 
 "tion would reassure the Protestants of Ireland; and it 
 " was important that their suspicions should not as yet be 
 "aroused. The person entrusted with the preparation of 
 " the Popish revolution in Ireland, and with organizing the 
 "troops who might come when the proper time arrived,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 "was a Popish officer named Talbot, created Earl of 
 " Tyrconnel by the King." He was the Parnell of that 
 day ! May we, in this day, have our eyes opened and our 
 energies aroused after the example of our forefathers two 
 centuries ago ! The history of that day is repeating itself 
 so exactly in this day that we must be crass indeed if we 
 do not understand the recondite meaning of events ; and 
 then but a little energy will be required to speak out what 
 we see ; and that will suffice to stop the Jesuit schemes for 
 the present. 
 
 In reading Armand Carrel's book we turn back fre- 
 quently to the title-page, to assure ourselves that we are 
 not perusing contemporary history. "To obtain or to 
 " retain certain employments, it was necessary to be of the 
 "same religion with the King." A famous crypto-Jesuit 
 used to say to me, even in the days of the Protestant Lord 
 Palmerston, that there were two sides in the House ; but 
 that the division was not between Whig and Tory, Radical 
 and Conservative, or any other political parties. Then, he 
 added, " rest assured that no one ever gets on in the House 
 "except either by Palmerston or by me" Armand Carrel 
 continues : " The mysteries of Catholicism became the 
 " common topic of conversation at Court and in the 
 " upper circles of society. . . . Lay converters went 
 " about making proselytes amidst fetes and frivolous 
 "amusements. Those who had favours to obtain were 
 " eager to listen and to seem to profit ; men, notorious 
 " for the irregularity of their lives affected to be struck 
 " with sudden illumination." There are even those in 
 England who consent to work in the Romanist cause at 
 the bidding of their superiors, and yet profess to be 
 Mahommedans. An earl said to me the other day : " Be 
 " an Atheist, be a Freethinker, be a Mahommedan, be 
 " anything you like, but do not belong to the Church of 
 " England." He had just told me of one, who is extremely 
 high in the land, who poses as a Protestant and as one of 
 the chiefs of the Freemasons, and yet had received a dis-
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 pensation from the Pope to remain so, even after having 
 been received with great though secret pomp into the 
 Roman Catholic society of the Knights of Malta ! 
 
 A very few years ago, the ancient Ecclesiastical Courts 
 of the Church of England were abolished, and a new court 
 was established with Lord St. Leonards at the head of it. 
 At the time when this was accomplished the Jesuit re- 
 viewers, as we shall hereafter show, took it upon them to 
 explain that this was done in order to destroy the Church 
 of England by the internal dissensions which it would 
 permit. Suffice it here to remark that, in the time of 
 James II., Lord Jeffreys "advised the re-establishment of 
 "an old ecclesiastical tribunal, the Court of High Com- 
 " mission, which had been abolished by the Parliament of 
 " 1640." Of this court Jeffreys was president. This court, 
 instead of being a shelter for Ritualistic abuses, by shutting 
 out the action of others, " was to inquire into all abuses 
 " punishable by the censure of the Church, and to summon 
 "before it ecclesiastics, of what rank soever, and to judge 
 "them without appeal." Dr. Sharp preached against 
 Romanism, and the Bishop of London was ordered to 
 suspend him forthwith for that "abuse." The bishop 
 pleaded that it would be against the law to do so, and 
 was tried before the Court of High Commission for dis- 
 obedience. "At that period the preponderance of the 
 " Catholic party in the Ministry, in the Privy Council, in 
 " the Administration, and in the higher ranks of the army, 
 " was no longer contested. . . . Tyrconnel wrote that 
 " it was time to restore their political rights to the Irishmen 
 " who professed the religion of the King ; that he was 
 " about to introduce them into the Municipal Corporations, 
 " or to remove the charters of recusant bodies, and that 
 " the only obstacle to the execution of this measure was 
 " the presence of the Earl of Clarendon ; " and then the 
 Earl of Clarendon, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, was re- 
 moved. The people began to see the turn affairs were 
 taking, but the Court of High Commission "shackled and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 "depressed the opposition of the Anglican clergy," who 
 dared not open their lips in the pulpit against the Roman- 
 izing action of the King's Government. 
 
 " In order to secure the rising generation, it was necessary 
 "to have the direction of education. Not content with 
 " having founded colleges where the Catholic youth might 
 "be brought up secure from Protestant seductions, they 
 " determined to invade the Universities themselves ; " and 
 so they obtained the election, to fellowships of the colleges, 
 of persons who would be content to work in their interest. 
 The letters from the Jesuits of Liege exulted over the 
 prosperous state of the Romanist religion in England, and 
 explained all that the Society was doing to remove educa- 
 tion out of the hands of heretics ; they continued in these 
 words : " We have got chairs of humanity at Lincoln, 
 " Norwich, and York ; and at Worcester, a public chapel 
 " under the protection of the soldiery. Our brethren are 
 " about to purchase some houses at Wigan, in Lancashire. 
 " Our interests are advancing most powerfully. Fathers 
 " of our Order preach before the Royal Family, and in the 
 "principal churches." These letters also announced the 
 future elevation of Father Petre, the Jesuit, to the dignity 
 of Cardinal ; and the placing of Father Warner, the Jesuit 
 rector of St. Omer, about the King, as his confessor and 
 spiritual director. Father Petre was also sworn of the 
 King's Privy Council, and Monsignor d'Adda was publicly 
 received as Papal Nuncio at Windsor, just as Cardinal 
 Manning was, last year, received at Marlborough House to 
 the Prince's garden-party, at which the Queen was present. 
 The Papal newspaper, the Journal de Rome, exulting over 
 this fact as a proof of the progress of Romanism in the 
 highest ranks of society, explained that Cardinal Manning 
 had been received as " the Papal Nuncio at the Court of 
 " St. James's." As such he ranks on the Commission for 
 Housing the Poor, immediately after the Prince of Wales ; 
 the Marquis of Salisbury and the Anglican Bishop of 
 Bedford consenting to be placed after him. Verily Sir
 
 lo RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Robert Peel's warning to a Scotch deputation will be found 
 true : " The time is coming, and is very near, when we 
 shall have to fight, over again, the battle of the Reforma- 
 " tion." Truly also Archbishop Manning wrote (" Essays 
 on Religion," second series, p. 12-14) : "I n tne l ast thirty 
 " years (i.e. since 1837) there has sprung up in the Anglican 
 " establishment an extensive rejection of Protestantism, 
 " and a sincere desire and claim to be Catholic. . . . 
 " Protestantism is recognised as a thing intrinsically un- 
 " tenable and irreconcilable with the (Roman) Catholic 
 " Faith. The school, of which I speak, claim to be Catholic, 
 " because they reject Protestantism with all its heterodoxies. 
 "...'. At this time, the doctrine of the Sacraments, their 
 " nature, number, and grace ; the intercession and invocation 
 "of the saints; the power of the priesthood in sacrifice 
 " and absolution ; the excellence and obligations of the re- 
 " ligious life ; are all held and taught by clergymen of the 
 " Church of England. . . . Add to this the practice of 
 " confession, and the works of temporal and spiritual mercy, 
 " in form and by rule borrowed from the (Roman) Catholic 
 " Church, all are to be found among those who are still 
 "within the Anglican communion. I must also add the 
 " latest and strangest phenomenon of this movement, the 
 " adoption of an elaborate ritual, with its vestments, bor- 
 " rowed from the (Roman) Catholic Church. . . . The 
 " multitude worshipping in churches which might almost 
 " be mistaken for ours ... is very great. They are 
 " coming up to the very threshold of the (Roman) Church. 
 " They have learned to lean upon it as the centre of 
 " Christendom, from which they sprang, and upon which 
 " their own Church is supposed to rest. They use our de- 
 " votions, our books, our pictures of piety. They are taught 
 ' to believe the whole Council of Trent, not, indeed, in its 
 " own true meaning, but in a meaning invented by their 
 " teachers." The plague infects also the evangelical clergy 
 and people. Cardinal Manning says (p. 10) : "Thousands 
 " who would not for the world set foot in a Romish Church,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 11 
 
 "read photographic descriptions of High Masses, and Re- 
 " quiems, and consecrations, processions, pilgrimages, and 
 " canonizations. The air is full of it." That is indeed a 
 curious phenomenon of Queen Victoria's reign. The cause 
 of this will become plain in the following numbers. 
 
 NO. III. 
 
 I HAVE endeavoured to unfold the plan devised by the 
 Jesuits, and committed to Earl Tyrconnel to carry out in 
 practice. The main features in that conspiracy were : 
 (i) To weaken the Protestant Church in Ireland ; (2) To 
 destroy the influence of the Protestant landlords, by worry- 
 ing them out, and depriving them of their lands ; (3) To 
 separate Ireland from England, and put it under the pro- 
 tection of some Roman Catholic Power ; (4) To get all 
 the education of the Irish into the hands of the Jesuits and 
 their adherents ; and (5) As means towards those ends, to 
 substitute in Ireland, for the law of the land, an unwritten 
 law of the agitators, backed by terrorism ; and to promote 
 to places in the army, to offices in the State, and to other 
 lucrative and influential posts, only those Roman Catholics 
 who would work at the beck and bid of the Jesuits ; or 
 those Protestants who had so committed themselves, as to 
 be entirely under the power of the Jesuits. 
 
 Committees of Parliament were, by the Romish bishops, 
 assured, in the strongest and most decisive language, in 
 1824 and 1825, that under no circumstances would they 
 ever disturb the Irish Church, and the settlement of Irish 
 landed property ; and yet we might turn over the files of 
 the daily papers and cull hundreds of examples, during the 
 last decennial period, to prove how rigidly statesmen, of 
 both parties, have adhered to the Jesuit plan in all its de- 
 tails. The difficulty is to know where to begin. But at 
 hap-hazard, take a speech which Mr. Gladstone delivered 
 at Southport on Dec. iQth, 1867. After complaining that
 
 I2 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 the ecclesiastical endowments in Ireland are enjoyed by 
 the minority (i.e. Protestants), he said, " Now I must ex- 
 " press to you my firm conviction that principles of religion 
 " must be ESTABLISHED in Ireland. ... As to the modes 
 " of giving effect to this principle, I do not enter upon 
 " them. I am of opinion they should be dictated, as a 
 " general rule, by that which may appear to be the mature, 
 " well-considered, and general sense of the Irish people" In 
 England the principles of religion are established ; for we 
 have the Established Church, in accordance with the gen- 
 eral sense of the English people. In Scotland the Presby- 
 terian Church is established in accordance with the general 
 sense of the Scotch people. In Ireland Mr. Gladstone 
 advocated the establishment of the Romish Church in ac- 
 cordance with the general sense of the Irish people. He 
 continued, as to education : " Ireland has not received, up 
 " to this hour, equal treatment in that matter ; and I will 
 "tell you how. In this country you are aware that the 
 "great bulk of parents are in the habit of sending their 
 " children to be trained in schools and colleges ivhere the 
 " inculcation of the religion to which they belong forms an 
 " essential and fundamental part of t/ie instruction that is 
 "given" He then mentioned the secular colleges and un- 
 denominational schools established by Sir R. Peel in Ire- 
 land, and said : " Now we would not bear that ourselves. 
 " / own that if I were prohibited from sending my son to be 
 " trained in a school where his religion was taught, I should 
 " think it a great grievance? Next is a speech of Mr. 
 Gladstone, delivered at Wigan, in South Lancashire, on 
 October 23rd, 1868. Quite ancient history! I hear some 
 adherent of the Jesuits exclaim. Yes ; you seek to work 
 on the frivolity of the present day, and pretend that every- 
 thing which tells against you is ancient history ! But what 
 if Mr. Gladstone, sixteen years ago, declared the secret of 
 his future policy ? What if he, by making that declaration 
 to the people of England, and getting returned to power, 
 what if he made the people of England accomplices in his
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 13 
 
 work ? Here is the speech : " I beg you to attend carefully 
 " to that which I am about to say. The statesmen of two 
 " generations ago, with Mr. Pitt at their head " You see 
 that Mr. Gladstone finds no harm in resorting to ancient 
 history, when it suits his purpose! those statesmen, Mr. 
 Gladstone said, "were parties to investing the Roman 
 " Catholics with a portion of their political rights, in the 
 " shape of the elective franchise, and knew perfectly well 
 " what they were doing ; they knew perfectly well that 
 " that must be followed, and ought to be followed, by their 
 " admission into Parliament ; and likewise that it must be 
 " followed by the concession of religious equality. The 
 " difference is this, and the only difference is this : at 
 " that period the intention undoubtedly was to grant reli- 
 " gious equality, not by disestablishing the Established 
 " Church, but by creating Roman Catholic and Presby- 
 terian Churches by its side. There is no doubt at all 
 " about that. The mode of attaining the end was differ- 
 " ent ; the end itself was the same." He seems to have 
 wrested ancient history and perverted Pitt's policy in order 
 to make out that Pitt entertained the same end as himself. 
 There can be no doubt, as we shall see, about the modern 
 history of 1868, and Mr. Gladstone's policy from that day 
 to this. He continued : " What I want you to observe is 
 " that the Roman Catholics' claim to religious equality is 
 " no new claim ; it was recognised by Mr. Pitt, and by 
 " Lord Castlereagh too, shortly after the Union, and recog- 
 " nised as a necessary part of the policy on which that 
 " Union was based." The very words of the Act of Union 
 seem to disprove Mr. Gladstone's assertion. Besides, if 
 Pitt and Castlereagh, who " knew perfectly well what they 
 " were doing," did not recognise that pretended principle 
 until "shortly after the Union," how could it have been 
 " a necessary part of the policy on which that Union was 
 "based?" Mr. Gladstone continued: "It is clear the 
 " Church of Ireland offers to us indeed a great question ; 
 "but even that question is but one of a group of questions.
 
 I4 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " There is the Church of Ireland; there is the land of 
 "Ireland; there is the education of Ireland. There are 
 "many subjects, all of which depend upon one greater t]i an 
 "them all. They are all so many branches from one 
 "trunk; and that trunk is the tree of what is called 
 " PROTESTANT ASCENDENCY. Gentlemen, I look, for one, 
 " to this Protestant people to put down Protestant ascend- 
 " ency. . . . It is upon that system that we are banded 
 " together to make war. . . . Although, as I said early in 
 " these remarks, we have paid instalments to Ireland, the 
 " mass of the people would not be worthy to be free if they 
 "were satisfied with instalments; ... we, therefore, 
 " aim at the destruction of that system of ascendency, which, 
 "though it has been crippled and curtailed by former 
 " measures, yet still it must be allowed does exist. It is 
 " still there, like a tall tree of noxious growth, lifting its 
 " head to heaven and darkening and poisoning the land, so 
 "far as its shadow can extend. It is still there, gentlemen; 
 " and now at length the day has come when, as we hope, 
 " the axe has been laid at the root of that tree, and it nods 
 " and quivers from its top to its base. It wants, gentlemen, 
 "one stroke more the stroke of these elections. It will 
 " then, once for all, totter to its fall ; and on the day when 
 " it falls, the heart of Ireland will leap for joy." 
 
 In that speech Mr. Gladstone distinctly warned the 
 English nation of his policy. He most unmistakably 
 proclaimed his determination to make war upon and 
 destroy the whole system of Protestant ascendency, 
 avowed his conviction that Protestantism was a tall tree 
 of noxious growth, which darkened and poisoned 
 whole land. He stated his intention to follow in the 
 footsteps of Tyrconnel, and work out the Jesuit plan, by 
 sapping the foundations of the Established Church of 
 Ireland, by striking repeated blows at the land system of 
 Ireland, by confiscating the property of Irish landlc 
 and by putting the education of Ireland into the hands c 
 the Roman Catholic priests and their obedient slaves.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 15 
 
 Three days previously (October 2ist), Mr. Gladstone 
 had made another speech, at Southport, which further 
 unfolded his policy : " If large sums were given for the 
 "endowment of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, 
 "there would be an expectation that, in return for that 
 " endowment, concessions should be made by the Roman 
 " Catholics, and a power of interference be allowed by the 
 " British Government in the internal affairs of that Church." 
 That was, then, the ground of Mr. Gladstone's objection to 
 the " concurrent endowment," or " levelling up " system (as 
 it was called), which was the policy of Mr. D'Israeli, and 
 which, Mr. Gladstone would have us to believe, was the 
 policy of Pitt also. Mr. Gladstone objected to that policy, 
 because it would be " injurious and mischievous to them " 
 (the Roman Catholics). He said further: " I am of opinion 
 " that the plan of all endowment which the Government (of 
 " Mr. D'Israeli) choose as the proper method of dealing with 
 " the Irish Church, while it cannot be adopted, is a plan 
 "which ought not to be adopted." Mr. Gladstone then 
 proceeded to quote from the Pope's newspaper the Roman 
 Observer, of March, 1868, which he described as "giving 
 " an opinion expressed in Rome, under authority." He 
 added : " The person who wrote that paragraph did not do 
 "so from his own opinion, but from inspiration conveyed 
 " through other channels and from higher quarters." The 
 quotations were as follows : " Mr. D'Israeli recognised 
 "the necessity of endowing the Roman Catholic Church 
 " in Ireland ; and that it might not be supposed that 
 "he wished to give stipends to the Catholic priests, he 
 "declared that he rejected the idea of what is commonly 
 " called paying the clergy. He declared accordingly that 
 " the Catholics should have the right of property in Ireland 
 "as elsewhere." The other quotation, after referring (he 
 said) to the Pope's Syllabus and Encyclical Letter, con- 
 tinued thus: "Among the speeches pronounced on this 
 "occasion is conspicuous that of the First Minister, Mr. 
 "D'Israeli, who pronounced so manv noble truths in
 
 1 6 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " defence of the propositions set forth in the Syllabus 
 " and Encyclical of Pius the Ninth, as should raise a blush 
 "on the faces of those pigmies in Italy and elsewhere, who 
 "pretend to be great men, while they resist decisions of 
 "the Pope which have been justified, acknowledged, and 
 "proclaimed, even by one of the highest genius and the 
 "widest reputation, such as is the First Minister, Mr. 
 "D'Israeli." Mr. Gladstone then taught us the conclusion 
 which might legitimately be drawn from those words: 
 " Now, gentlemen, I am going to put to you a question : 
 " Suppose that out of that paragraph you strike the words 
 " First Minister, Mr. D'Israeli, and put Opposition speaker, 
 " Mr. Gladstone, and suppose the Roman newspaper under 
 "the Pope's authority had written of me that I had 
 "pronounced so many noble truths in defence of the 
 " Encyclical and of the Syllabus, as to make those pigmies 
 "blush, who refused to admit truths acknowledged by a 
 "heretic like myself, suppose there had been such a 
 "paper, I ask you whether it would not have been plac- 
 "arded on every wall in this country, as a damning 
 "demonstration of the Popish intentions of myself and the 
 " Liberal party." 
 
 At Warrington, on October I2th, he had already pro- 
 nounced this eulogy on the Roman Church : " I must 
 "say that it does the Roman Catholic Church some 
 " credit, when I consider their readiness and determination 
 " to rely on their ancient and unbroken traditions, and on 
 " the zeal and perseverance of their subordinates." 
 
 Thus we learn, from Mr. Gladstone himself, that he did 
 not stand alone in his anxiety to cut down the tree of 
 Protestantism ; but that Mr. D'Israeli, while in pretended 
 opposition and simulated hostility, had in view " the same 
 "end," although the means he proposed were slightly 
 different. Thus was revealed to the people of England 
 the truth which was avowed to me by an eminent Jesuit, 
 on the death of Lord Palmerston, in these words: "Ai 
 "last we have got England between the upper and nether
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 17 
 
 "millstone" that is, between Gladstone and D'Israeli. 
 This point opens a large field of inquiry, which I must 
 not do more than touch very sparingly before proceeding 
 to notice the abscission of the various branches of the 
 Upas tree of Protestant ascendency. 
 
 No. IV. 
 
 WHEN an orator and subtle master of fence pleases to 
 make a confidant of a subordinate, then we frequently 
 arrive at the plan existing in the statesman's mind, and 
 revealed in a gushing moment to a garrulous Irishman. 
 Such was the result when Mr. Gladstone took the late Sir 
 John Gray into confidence. On this ground, Sir John 
 Gray's speech in 1868 was well worthy of attentive study. 
 
 In reply to the Roman Catholic Bishop and electors of 
 Kilkenny, Sir John Gray took credit to himself for having 
 converted Mr. Gladstone. He said on August 2ist, 1868 : 
 " I felt that the question (Disestablishment of the Church) 
 " had arrived at a point when it was essential that it should 
 " pass from the hands of a private member to those of the 
 " leader of a great party ; and I resolved to open direct 
 " communication with the man who, above and before all 
 " others, seemed suited to the Herculean task of redeeming 
 " the fame of England by doing justice to Ireland. The 
 " result you know. The future Premier of England now 
 " has the charge of the Irish Church Question. But you 
 " never can know, for even were I at liberty to detail what 
 " occurred at the several private interviews with which I 
 " was favoured, I would not have the power adequately to 
 " convey to you a just impression of the generous, earnest 
 " and hearty devotion with which Mr. Gladstone determined 
 " to pledge his future as a statesman to the redress of this 
 " great wrong." 
 
 These interviews took place in March, 1868, and on the 
 26th, Sir John Gray's newspaper, The Freeman s Journal, 
 
 C
 
 1 8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 wrote : " The debate (on the Irish Church) will be one of 
 " the most memorable that the present generation has wit- 
 " nessed, and the issue will involve not only the fate of the 
 " Ministry, but the fate, sooner or later, of the dominant 
 " State Church, not only in Ireland, but in England also. 
 " The great Liberal party are determined to deal a death- 
 " blow at all State endowments; and the new constituencies, 
 " which the Reform Bill has called into existence, will fully 
 " endorse that policy." 
 
 After those repeated and confidential interviews with Mr. 
 Gladstone, on October ;th, 1868, Sir John Gray said to the 
 electors of Kilkenny : " But I do believe that there is some- 
 thing more than the mere fidelity of the man to be looked 
 " at in a typical office, as this office (Lord Chancellor of 
 " Ireland) has been made ; and that it is essential, to win 
 "the confidence of the (Irish) people, for any man who 
 "seeks to come into power upon the overthrow of the 
 " present Ministry and their overthrow is certain that he 
 " should look to this typical office of Chancellor, and take 
 " care, on the first opportunity afforded, in order to indi- 
 " cateto the whole people a total, change of policy as well as 
 " law, a total change of system, thai a (Roman) Catholic 
 " should, for the first time these three hundred years, fi 
 " the first office of justice in Ireland. I hope, if you^ send 
 " me again as your representative, that you will commission 
 "me to say, in your name, that no party coming into 
 " power will acquire the confidence of this country, unless 
 " they recognise the typical character of that office, and 
 " take care that the present opportunity shall be availed ^of, 
 "to put a (Roman) Catholic of high position into i 
 In 1868, Mr. Gladstone came into power, and made Mr. 
 O'Hagan, a Roman Catholic, a Baron, and Lord Chancellor 
 of Ireland Mr. Gladstone had avowed that he would cut 
 down " the upas tree of Protestant ascendency ;" Sir John 
 Gray promised that Mr. Gladstone, on coming into power, 
 would put Roman Catholic ascendency in its place, 
 said, further : " And the beginning of the new system will
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 19 
 
 " be the uprooting, the annihilation of every trace of 
 " ascendency, the total disestablishment and disendow- 
 " ment of that alien Church which has been the curse of 
 " Ireland for three centuries, which has been, during the 
 " same period, the opprobrium and disgrace of England, 
 " and the scandal of the world. Well ; I know there is 
 "great opposition to that project, and there will be great 
 "opposition to it. ... I have as much faith in the 
 "sincerity, in the devotion, in the earnestness, and 
 " enthusiasm, and in the triumphant success, upon that 
 "question, of William Ewart Gladstone, as I have in the 
 " fact that the sun shines at noon-day, and will set to-night 
 " and rise to-morrow to shine upon us again." He also 
 knew of Mr. Gladstone's intention to destroy the Protestant 
 Irish landlords, as another step in Mr. Gladstone's policy 
 to annihilate Protestant ascendency : " The Protestant 
 " gentry have got the (Church) lands throughout your 
 " Diocese. They have those broad and fertile lands, at an 
 " average of 3-y. id. an acre. They are giving 4,000 a 
 " year to their Bishop. The system and law . . . have 
 "robbed you. ... I believe the land question has 
 " been impeded and obstructed by the delay of the settle- 
 " ment of the Church question ; and that we will not be in 
 " a position to insure a perfect and satisfactory solution of 
 "the land tenure question, until that great obstacle to 
 " all progress, the existence of a political Established 
 " Church, shall be put an end to. ... Everything 
 " that the tenant adds to the soil should be the tenant's. 
 " Everything that the tenant's skill, his industry, his sweat, 
 " his capital adds to the soil, should be his." Such were 
 the revelations of a member of Parliament, who had been 
 made the repository of Mr. Gladstone's confidences. 
 
 On the 5th of November, in the same year, Mr. Bright 
 said at Edinburgh : " In Ireland, the land really is not in 
 " the possession of ... natives. It seems to be an 
 " essential thing for the peace of every country, that its 
 " soil should at least be in possession of its own people.
 
 2O 
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 I believe that, in Ireland, it will be necessary to adopt 
 "some plan and I believe there is a plan which can b 
 "adopted without injustice or wrong to any man, by 
 "which gradually the land of Ireland may be, to a c 
 "siderable extent, transferred from foreign, or alien, or 
 "absentee, Protestant proprietors, transferred into t/u 
 " hands of the (Roman} Catholic resident population of 
 
 " country." 
 
 As Mr Bright was in Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet, we 
 suppose that he knew something of Mr. Gladstone's inner 
 mind. Sir John Gray had enjoyed the advantage 
 confidential conversations with Mr. Gladstone, and learned 
 his secret plans. Their voices were unheeded at the time. 
 Now the parts of the scheme which they foretold have 
 been realized, and we have confidence that Mr. Glads 
 intends to put the rest in execution. The Protestan 
 Church in Ireland, to be disestablished and disendowec 
 that has been effected. Its destruction was to be but 
 prelude to the disestablishment of the Protestant Churches 
 in England and Scotland : that is near at hand. 
 Protestant landlords of Ireland to be ruined : that feat Mr. 
 Gladstone has achieved. The lands to be given over 1 
 the Roman Catholic Church and Roman Catholic pe; 
 proprietors : that will soon be accomplished. The whol 
 Protestant system the monarchy, the nobility, the 
 siastical hierarchy doomed ultimately to fall, 
 secret machinations of an unseen power. And yet 
 people of England, seeing these things partially ao 
 plished, are still inert ! 
 
 Mr Gladstone's Bill for the Disestablishment of the 
 Irish Church, which was framed-not on Mr. D'Israel 
 principle of "levelling up," or giving endowments to a 
 religions in proportion to their respective adherents t 
 on the principle of "levelling down," or taking all en- 
 dowments from religious purposes-that Bill neverthele 
 proposed to give the sum of 364,000 to the Rome 
 Catholic Church, and no less than eight millions sterling
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 to " separate institutions," which were under the sole 
 charge of the " Christian Brothers," nuns and monks. So 
 much for Mr. Gladstone's adherence to that principle 
 which he so loudly expressed in order to beguile the 
 Liberals and Radicals into giving him their support ! 
 
 Cardinal Manning's organ, The Weekly Register, wrote, 
 when Mr. Gladstone had opened the campaign against the 
 Irish Protestant Church (Oct. 3ist, 1868), "It is felt that 
 " religious licence, and possibly even the very existence of Pro- 
 " testantism, are staked upon the issue of this fatal struggle. 
 " . . . The hour has arrived for the resuscitation of 
 " Catholicism" And yet Liberals and Radicals supported 
 Mr. Gladstone ! Why did they not consider the character 
 of that Roman Catholicism, already free, which they were 
 helping to resuscitate ? Let them learn it from Cardinal 
 Manning, 1 " If England is ever to be reunited to Christen- 
 " dom, it is by submission to tJie living authority of the Vicar 
 " of Jesus Christ, The first step of its return must be 
 " obedience to his voice, as rebellion against his authority 
 " was the first step of its departure." Nor are those 
 doctrines confined to Cardinal Manning. They were and 
 are taught by all the theologians and casuists of the 
 Romish Church. Take for example, " Perrone's Dogmatic 
 " Theology," 2 " Tolerantia religiosa est impia et absurda." 
 Knowing the intentions of Mr. Gladstone, and being 
 aware of the doctrines of the Romish Church, yet the 
 Liberals and Radicals of England and Scotland and 
 Wales were beguiled into supporting him ! 
 
 Let us pause here and take a retrospect of former 
 legislation, in order the better to perceive the direction 
 of its course for the last sixty years. 
 
 1 " Essays on Religion," p. 19. 
 
 2 Vol. iii. p. 345. Ed. Lou vain, 1838.
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. V. 
 
 IT was through " the Roman Catholic Emancipation Act," 
 in 1829, that the Romish Hierarchy first obtained an open 
 and avowed Parliamentary power. O'Connell was the 
 agent of the Church of Rome ; and the priests selected 
 the members who were to support him, and collected the 
 " rent " which paid the expenses of the elections. The 
 Papal party amounted to thirty members, about the same 
 number as supported Parnell up to the Reform Acts of 
 1885. O'Connell threatened and made himself obnoxious, 
 and so furnished an excuse to the English Ministry to 
 yield the demands of the Romish Bishops and fall in with 
 their plans. The Romish bishops set on foot two move- 
 ments : one against the Irish Protestant Church, the other 
 for the Repeal of the Union. The attack on the first was 
 commenced by a crusade against the payment of tithes to 
 a Church which was proclaimed as " alien," and therefore 
 unjust ; although it was one of the conditions on which the 
 tenants got their farms. Against the second the Fenian 
 Society was specially organized. The Fenian oath be- 
 trays its character. It is 1 : "I do solemnly swear 
 "that I renounce all allegiance to the Queen of England, 
 "that I will do all that may be in my power to make 
 " Ireland an independent democratic Republic, that I will 
 "implicitly obey all the orders of my superiors, and will 
 " take up arms on the first opportunity." 
 
 It was by the direct influence of the priests that hatred 
 of the Sassenach, who was termed an unjust conqueror, 
 and bloody oppressor of the Irish, was first engendered. 
 It was by the Romish emissaries that this feeling was 
 encouraged in 1641 ; it was during the time of James II. 
 that it was nurtured by the priests, until it culminated in 
 the conquest of 1688 ; it was by the priests that the hatred 
 was fanned into an all-absorbing passion in 1798 ; it was 
 through the Roman priests, as Wyse informs us, 2 that the 
 1 Senior, ii. 36. - History of the Catholic Association.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 23 
 
 Irish people, in 1828, were induced to cry out, "When will 
 " O'Connell call us out ? " It was through them that the 
 passion was revived in 1 842, 1 843 ; and through them it has 
 been urged on in 1880 and the subsequent years. In every 
 instance the hatred of England was most intense at the 
 time when England was prepared to yield most to the 
 demands of the Irish, and English ministers were pan- 
 dering to the wishes of Rome. Was that hatred a scourge 
 from God on the Romanizing tendencies of England ? 
 or was it the result of the contempt, engendered in a 
 quick-witted nation, for a people which deviated, through 
 weakness, from the path of rectitude and pure religion ? 
 
 In 1845, the recent scourge sent by God, in His Provi- 
 dence, on the Irish people, had left them greatly reduced 
 in numbers, and prostrate in spirit The Romish bishops 
 adapted their tactics to the spirit of the people. They 
 determined meekly to approach, and cunningly to deceive 
 the Government of England. They posed as suppliants, 
 and appealed on behalf of their flocks, in forma pauperum. 
 They desired education and enlightenment for poor 
 students ; but poverty precluded their affording it. The 
 annual grant to Maynooth led, each year, to bitter attacks 
 from bigoted Protestant newspapers ; and those attacks 
 wounded their feelings and humbled their laudable pride. 
 Make the grant permanent, and do away with this bitter- 
 ness ; increase it, and relieve our poverty. Thus will the 
 everlasting gratitude of the Irish insure for ever a love and 
 support for the English Government. That will be a mes- 
 sage of peace to Ireland, which will assuredly bring its 
 reward ; and nothing more will ever be desired or asked. 
 
 Such was the prayer of the Romish bishops. The 
 Government were deceived and seduced. The House of 
 Commons also pictured the crumbling walls, and starving 
 professors, and virtuous students, which existed only in 
 imagination. The British people disbelieved, and were 
 resentful ; but, nevertheless, the Maynooth Endowment 
 Act was forced upon them.
 
 24 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 The scene was then changed. For gratitude, there was 
 again a grievance ; instead of peace, there was the cry of 
 oppression. But the recent folly of Parliament enabled 
 the Romish bishops to educate their students at the ex- 
 pense of England, to hate everything English, and to 
 believe that rebellion would be the highest of virtues. 
 
 In 1846, an Irish member, of the name of Watson, acted 
 as the instrument of the designs of the Romish Hierarchy, 
 and introduced a Bill, which was thus described by Sir 
 James Graham : " The present Bill consists of four enact- 
 " ments : the first enables the archbishops and bishops of 
 " the Roman Catholic Church to assume the titles of the 
 " Sees of the Protestant Church ; the second, sanctions 
 " the appearance of Roman Catholic prelates and priests 
 " in pontificals in public places ; the third allows a judge, 
 " mayor, or sheriff to attend mass in his robes of office ; 
 "and the fourth removes all restrictions on the Regular 
 " Orders so as to allow the country to be filled with Jesuits 
 "and monks." This Bill was introduced just a year after 
 the message of peace, the Maynooth Endowment Act. 
 Sir R. Peel and Sir J. Graham resisted the Bill ; but the 
 House accepted it. The events of that momentous year 
 however, caused the Bill to fall through. 
 
 The bishops, who were to have been satisfied for ever 
 with the Maynooth Act, were now not satisfied with be- 
 sieging the Commons alone ; they also told Mr. D'Israeli's 
 great friend, Lord Lyndhurst, to make an assault on the 
 House of Lords. In all countries it has been the rule of 
 Law that no bishops might receive, as authoritative, any 
 Bull from the Pope, until the secular Government had seen 
 and sanctioned it. That was quite reasonable ; because 
 Bulls frequently declared the thrones of kings to be vacant, 
 and absolved all subjects from their allegiance, and called 
 on faithful Romanists to kill the adherents of such excom- 
 municated kings, and possess themselves of their thrones. 
 
 In 1846, however, Lord Lyndhurst said that the common 
 law was strong enough to prevent all Romish encroach-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 ments, and to keep out every Bull of the Pope. On this 
 ground he consented, on the part of the Government, to 
 repeal all the prohibitions on the free communication be- 
 tween the Pope and the Romish bishops. The eyes of 
 some, in regard to the insidious nature of this concession, 
 have been opened by the Committee of the House of 
 Commons on the Ecclesiastical Titles Act (1868), when 
 the real aim of the Pope was brought to light. The 
 Romish bishops admitted that, if any law of England 
 should not agree with any decree of the Pope, the latter 
 only would be binding on Roman Catholics. Thus the 
 Pope regards himself as the supreme sovereign of the 
 kingdom, and looks on the Queen with her Parliament 
 as merely his vassal. 
 
 In the same spirit, the Jesuit Univers,oi March 28, 1868, 
 laid it down that : " A Catholic should never attach him- 
 " self to any political party composed mainly of heretics. 
 " No one, who is truly at heart a thorough and complete 
 "Catholic, can give his entire adhesion to a Protestant 
 " Leader, be he Whig or Tory ; for in so doing he divides 
 " the allegiance, and in some cases destroys altogether, 
 " the allegiance which he owes to the Church. A Catholic 
 " cannot give himself up to any party in a Protestant 
 " country." 
 
 In the year 1846, the Conservative Ministry was over- 
 thrown on the question of Free Trade. Up to that time, 
 under a Conservative Government, the cause of the Pope 
 had made steady and continuous advances in Parliament 
 This the Papacy had accomplished by means of the 
 deception practised on the Prime Minister, and the 
 agitation concerning pretended grievances which had 
 been carried on throughout Ireland. 
 
 When Lord John Russell came into office, in the summer 
 of 1846, in conjunction with Lord Palmerston, Romanism 
 received a severe check ; and the foreign policy of the 
 Government was in strong antagonism to the intrigues of 
 the Pope. It was Lord Palmerston who, at the time of the
 
 26 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Sonderbund war in Switzerland, defeated the Jesuits ; and 
 the crypto-Jesuit member for Shrewsbury attacked him 
 with much bitterness for it, in the House of Commons. 
 
 " Intrigues of the Pope ? " Was he not a gentle, guile- 
 less old man? That may be; but yet he must do the 
 bidding of the Curia of the Vatican. The Curia is a 
 Cabinet of long standing, great practice, experience, and 
 knowledge of affairs. It never "goes out" by the action 
 of an adverse majority in a representative Chamber, 
 never suffers change, except as one member or another 
 drops off by old age and death. Like the Russian 
 Cabinet, it comprises all the best intellects of Europe and 
 the New World. It combines the astuteness of the Italian, 
 the solidity of the Englishman, the inventive genius of 
 the American, the clear subtlety of the Frenchman, the 
 dogged perseverance and persistence of the German, the 
 duplicity of the Oriental, and the falsehood of all. All 
 those varied intellects have been carefully trained for 
 their work, and been experienced in diplomacy; while 
 from the intimate reports derived from priestly confessors 
 all over the world, the best and most detailed knowledg 
 of the characters and intentions of statesmen, and the 
 passions of people, are ready to their hand. The Vatican 
 is the centre of all the intelligence and information of the 
 world ; and every bishop has periodically to visit Rome, 
 in order that his inmost soul may be probed, and his con- 
 tinual reports may be tested. Such is the Cabinet with 
 which Protestant statesmen hope on equal terms to cope ! 
 
 NO. VI. 
 
 THE great engine of the Romish Hierarchy is education. 
 They set themselves to mould the future generation, 
 and to implant in their youth all the ideas which they 
 desire them to be governed by in their manhood, 
 subdues their intellects ; she stops all independence of 
 thought ; she stunts every tendency to free inquiry ; while
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 27 
 
 she stuffs their minds with legends of the saints, marvels, 
 fictions, formularies, symbolisms, and rituals ; until, 
 crushed under the burden, and subdued by frequent " ex- 
 aminations of conscience" and confessions, they resign 
 themselves, tanquam cadavera, to their Spiritual Directors. 
 With such a system of education, the Protestant schools, 
 which strive to enkindle free inquiry, can never coalesce. 
 
 The Romish bishops, in answer to their demands, were 
 offered their choice of a national system, free of all sects ; 
 or a purely secular system. They chose the former, in 
 the assured hope that in a short time they would be able 
 to mould it to suit their own views. Archbishop Murray 
 was put on the Education Commission of the National 
 Schools in Ireland. Throughout Ireland, the priests be- 
 came patrons of the National Schools ; they attended 
 them daily; they managed to put them under masters 
 subservient to themselves. They ignored all remonstrances 
 from the Central Board, and winked at the irregularity of 
 attendance of the children. The rules of the Board were 
 disregarded, and Romanist catechisms were taught at all 
 times, and Roman Catholic emblems were continually 
 displayed. False returns were made to Parliament, to 
 deceive the anxious inquiring eyes of members, and to 
 obtain larger grants from the Treasury. 
 
 Yet something was taught ; and a demand for the Bible 
 was the result. Cardinal Cullen took fright ; and after 
 various ruses, he, in 1866, presented a memorial to the 
 Lord-Lieutenant, which was signed by all the Romanist 
 bishops. This memorial denounced the National system, 
 and demanded that the National Schools, above all the 
 model schools, should be placed entirely in the hands of 
 the Romish priesthood, as far, at least, as they dealt with 
 Roman Catholics. 1 Such a demand met with the failure 
 that its audacity deserved. Foiled, but not beaten, the 
 Cardinal drew back, and directed his energies to a new 
 point of attack. 
 
 1 Papers on University and National Education, March 5th, 1866.
 
 2S RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 After a long correspondence, which ranged over the 
 months from August, 1865, to January, 1866, the Cabinet 
 agreed with the Romish Hierarchy. Mr. Gladstone's 
 Cabinet agreed that they "will advise Her Majesty to 
 "grant a charter of incorporation to the College founded in 
 " Dublin, by the Roman Catholic Archbishops, for the higher 
 " education of youth," and are ready "to grant a sum for the 
 " purpose of bourses." l The House of Commons was in- 
 dignant at this bargain ; but Mr. Gladstone calmed them 
 by a formal undertaking not to carry it out until members 
 had had an opportunity of discussing it. That engagement. 
 Mr. Gladstone evaded ; that promise, Mr. Gladstone broke, 
 During the autumn recess he caused Her Majesty to sign 
 a charter of incorporation for a Roman Catholic College ; 
 and he designated a large sum of money for its use. But 
 the instrument was found to be illegal ; and the faithless 
 scheme was frustrated. 
 
 In the midsummer of 1866, Mr. Gladstone was beaten 
 in committee on the Reform Bill, and Lord Derby, with 
 his superior and master Mr. D'Israeli, came into office. 
 Archbishop Leahy 2 avowed that the bishops insisted 
 always on the largest demands, and took as much as they 
 could get. A secret committee to frame a scheme of 
 education agreeable to Rome, was appointed by Mr. 
 D'Israeli, consisting of Archbishop Leahy, Lord Mayo, 
 Archbishop Manning, and Mr. D'Israeli himself. The 
 scheme was framed ; Cardinal Manning took it to Rome ; 
 and it was approved by the Pope ! 
 
 Hear how Archbishop M'Hale vaunted himself on this 
 point, when referring to the English Government and Irish 
 Landlords, at Castlebar, on August 8th, 1868 : "We come 
 " here to tell these gentlemen to content themselves with 
 " the exercise of their own power ; and we are resolved 
 "that they must not interfere with us in the exercise of 
 "our duties, nor transgress their limits. . . . What are 
 
 1 Papers on University and National Education, March 5th, 1886. 
 " Further correspondence with Lord Mayo," the Irish Secretary.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 29 
 
 "these interfering gentry doing at this very hour? Have 
 " we the freedom of education that belongs to us ? It was 
 " not said to emperors, or kings, or queens, that they 
 " should teach, an office that exclusively belongs to the 
 "Catholic Hierarchy. Yet these presumptuous people 
 "have usurped this office; for they have advocated and 
 " supported Anti-Catholic and Anti-National Education ! 
 " Consequently they have attempted the ruin of the faith 
 " and the morality of the flocks committed to our charge." 
 
 There was, at the same time, another Papal attack going 
 on. Cardinal Manning wrote, l that the Queen's supre- 
 macy is the essence of heresy, and " the Reformation in 
 " concrete " ; and that the English Government " has headed 
 " the unbelief and the sedition of Europe, and directs the 
 " full power of England against the Catholic Church, and, 
 " above all, against the Holy See " ; and is " essentially a 
 "denial of the Divine institution of the Church, and re- 
 presents a population not only in schism and heresy, but 
 " traditionally hostile to the spiritual authority of the Church 
 " and the Pontiffs." 2 Again 3 he said : " If ever there was 
 " a land in which work was to be done, and perhaps much 
 " to suffer, it is here. I shall not say too much if I say 
 " that we have to subjugate and subdue, to conquer and rule, 
 " an imperial race. We have to do ^vith a will which reigns 
 " throughout the world, as t/ie will of old Rome reigned once. 
 "WE HAVE TO BEND OR BREAK THAT WILL WHICH 
 "NATIONS AND KINGDOMS HAVE FOUND INVINCIBLE 
 "AND INFLEXIBLE. . . . Were heresy conquered in 
 " England, it would be conquered throughout the world. 
 " All its lines meet here ; and therefore in England the 
 " Church of God must be gathered in its strength." 
 
 That this was a fixed determination with Cardinal 
 Manning, is shown by the fact that in his "Address to the 
 "Third Provincial Council of the Archdiocese of West- 
 " minster," he reverted to the same subject : "This XlXth 
 
 1 "Essays on Religion." s Sermons, 1863, p. 63. 
 
 3 Tablet, Aug. 6th, 1859.
 
 3 o RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Century will make a great epoch in the history of the 
 " Church. . . . It is good for us to be here in England. 
 "It is yours, Right Reverend Fathers, to subjugate and 
 "subdue, to bend and to break the will of an Imperial 
 " race ; the will which, as of Rome of old, rules over 
 "nations and peoples, invincible and inflexible. . . . 
 "You have a great commission to fulfil, and great is the 
 " prize for which you strive. Surely a soldier's eye and 
 " a soldier's heart would choose, by intuition, this field of 
 " England for the warfare of the Faith. None ampler or 
 "nobler could be found. . . . It is the head of Pro- 
 " testantism ; the centre of its movements, and the strong- 
 " hold of its powers. Weakened in England, it is paralyzed 
 "everywhere. Conquered in England, it is conquered 
 " throughout the world. Once overthrown here, all is but 
 " a war of detail. All the roads of the whole world meet 
 " in one point ; and, this point reached, the whole world 
 " is open to the ChurcJis will. England is the key of the 
 " whole position of modern error." 
 
 And therefore all the efforts and energies, all the dupli- 
 cities and dissimulations, of which they are masters, will 
 be directed to bending and breaking the will of the English 
 people, and to subjugating and subduing Englishmen to 
 the will of the Pope. If this cannot be done by means of 
 Home Rule agitations in Ireland, and if dynamite explo- 
 sions and socialist riots in England do not suffice to 
 accomplish their purpose, then other measures will be 
 resorted to. 
 
 Further, Cardinal Manning said J : " There is only one 
 " solution of the difficulty, a solution I fear impending, 
 an d that is, the terrible scourge of a continental war, 
 "a war which will exceed the horrors of any of the wars 
 " of the first Empire." 
 
 That is the aim of the Papacy, to weaken and to humble 
 England ; to dismember the Empire ; to render her the 
 prey to her enemies in a great Continental war. Mr. 
 1 Tablet, Jan. 24, 1874.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 31 
 
 William Monsell 1 was selected in 1865 to make the very 
 small beginning of this project. He demanded that the 
 Roman Catholic oath of 1829 should be repealed ; and Mr. 
 Gladstone, his fellow servant, was ready to help him and 
 Rome. The Bill was passed through the Commons, but 
 failed in the House of Lords. Not defeated, the Romish 
 prelates set agoing the chatter of brainless persons in 
 fashionable saloons, and all began to say that oaths were 
 useless ; oaths were even a scandal. During the autumn 
 and winter, enough persons had committed themselves to 
 this doctrine their vanity binding them to uphold what 
 they had once asserted to constitute a most formidable 
 phalanx. Mr. Gladstone's Government was therefore able, 
 in February, 1866, to introduce a Bill to sweep away 
 oaths. Mr. Dillon, an ally of Cardinal Cullen, now well 
 known as a prominent Land Leaguer, published a letter 
 in the Tablet of April 2ist, 1866, saying that a bargain 
 had been struck, a Kilmainham Treaty signed, by Mr. 
 Gladstone and the Pope's adherents in the House of 
 Commons. These were his words : The Pope's brass band 
 were " to give an unconditional support of the extension of 
 " the Franchise Bill. I say unconditional in this sense, 
 " that we have not gone to Mr. Gladstone and demanded 
 " formal pledges from him in respect of Irish measures, as 
 " the price of our votes ; but not in the sense that we are 
 " entirely in the dark as to what the Government are likely to 
 " do. The relations of the ' National Association ' towards 
 " the Government may be thus shortly stated : The 
 " Association has put forward four claims : the Reform of 
 " the Land Laws ; the removal of obnoxious oaths ; free- 
 " dom and equality of education ; and the disendowment of 
 " the Established Church. The Government concede the first 
 "two at once; tliey will give an instalment of the third ; and 
 "as to the fourth, they ask us to wait a little, as its hands 
 " are full, bidding us in the meantime God speed ! " 
 When the Oaths Bill reached the House of Lords, 
 
 1 Lord Emly.
 
 32 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 a Roman Catholic deputation had an interview with 
 Lord Derby, and Mr. Wegg Prosser, a Roman Catholic, 
 sent an account of the interview to the Tablet of April 
 I4th, 1866. The deputation told Lord Derby that 
 Archbishop Manning would not endure any reference to 
 the Act of Settlement being put into the Bill ; and as to 
 admitting, in any way, the Queen's supremacy, that was 
 altogether impossible. Mr. Prosser then stated that Arch- 
 bishop Manning was consulted, after the interview, and 
 that the Archbishop had determined to lay the matter 
 before all the Roman Catholic bishops. The result, as 
 stated by Mr. Prosser, was that : " No good Catholic could 
 "take part in enacting such a measure as the Act of 
 " Settlement of the Crown, because it expressly excludes a 
 " Catholic from the succession on the very ground of his 
 "religion; and it follows that no Catholic can share in 
 " enacting an oath to maintain and support the Act of 
 " Settlement ; but it does not follow that a Catholic may 
 " not take such an oath when already enacted by those 
 " over whom he has not control." 
 
 Lord Derby, who was always too much a puppet in Mr. 
 D'Israeli's hands, gave way ; and Mr. Gladstone, at Liver- 
 pool, thus explained the nature of the Oaths Bill : " All 
 "persons holding positions of political trust in either 
 " House of Parliament, for civil purposes, will be wholly and 
 " individually released from the necessity of making any 
 " religious profession. I cannot but congratulate you on 
 " this most signal triumph that we have achieved. I am 
 " bound to say that / have been surprised myself at the 
 "facility with which the Bill Jias progressed in Parliament" 
 It was, therefore, not a matter of wonder that Arch- 
 bishop Manning, in the Tablet of October 24th, 1868, 
 should have lavished encomiums on Mr/Gladstone and his 
 services to the Roman Church ; and no surprise that 
 Cardinal Cullen should have boasted of having received an 
 assurance from Mr. Gladstone that he would promote the 
 schemes of the Irish National Association.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 33 
 
 No. VII. 
 
 THE Bill of Rights and the Act of 1829 excluded Roman 
 Catholics from filling the offices of Regent, Lord High 
 Commissioner in Scotland, Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, the 
 Lord Chancellor of England, and the Lord Chancellor of 
 Ireland. The holder of each of those five offices is an im- 
 mediate representative of the Sovereign ; and as the Sove- 
 reign must, by the Act of Settlement, be a Protestant, so 
 must the holders of those offices. But Cardinal Cullen had 
 said, in 1851, that the primary object on which the Catholic 
 Defence Society insisted, was the repeal of " the Coronation 
 " Oath and the Act of Settlement, which limit the possession 
 "of the Crown to Protestants." Against the outworks 
 of Protestantism, against the Protestant character of the 
 representatives of the Sovereign, Cardinal Cullen and 
 Archbishop Manning now directed their attacks, in order 
 that they might seize the citadel, and that the Sovereign 
 might openly profess Catholicism. Sir Colman O'Loghlen 
 who was selected to introduce the Bill on March 2Oth, 
 1866, said : " He did not desire to make any change what- 
 " ever in the law which excluded Roman Catholics from 
 " those offices ; he merely wished to put an end to the 
 " necessity, at present imposed upon Protestants, under 
 " certain circumstances, to make the declaration that they 
 "were Protestants. The declaration was a relic of bar- 
 " barism which ought to be immediately erased from the 
 " statute-book." 
 
 On the 8th of May, on the second reading of the Bill, Mr. 
 Cogan said : " The Bill contained a proviso that nothing 
 "contained in it should be construed as giving the Roman 
 " Catholics a right to fill the offices either of Lord Lieu- 
 " tenant or Lord Chancellor of Ireland. The simple object of 
 " the measure was to remove a declaration which was at once 
 " offensive and useless" A month later (June 8th) Sir George 
 Bowyer and Sir Patrick O'Brien used similar language. 
 The simple-minded English members, thinking that they 
 
 D
 
 34 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 were merely doing a kindness to Roman Catholics, without 
 any injury to Protestantism, carelessly passed the Bill. 
 
 In the House of Lords, on July i6th, Lord Derby showed 
 that no security whatever was given for the security which 
 really was abandoned. The House of Lords were guided 
 by him, and rejected the Bill. Sir Colman O'Loghlen, 
 and Mr. Cogan had, however, acted their parts, and were 
 rewarded by Mr/Gladstone by being raised to the dignity 
 of Privy Councillors of Her Majesty. Yet Sir Colman 
 O'Loghlen was one of the secretaries who had issued a 
 most seditious declaration in favour of the repeal of the 
 Union of England and Ireland in April, I848. 1 
 
 On Feb. 27, 1867, while Lord Derby was Prime 
 Minister, Sir Colman O'Loghlen brought in a Bill "to 
 " supplement the Offices and Oaths Act," " the object of 
 " which was to open to Roman Catholics the offices from 
 "which they were excluded. It was therefore a Bill of 
 "considerable importance. At the time when Catholic 
 " Emancipation was carried, there were five offices expressly 
 "kept from Roman Catholics," etc., etc. Sir George 
 Bowyer, Mr. Cogan, and Sir Patrick O'Brien, then joined 
 with Sir Colman O'Loghlen, in committee on the Bill, for 
 the insertion of the following clause : " All the Queen's 
 " subjects, without reference to their religious belief, shall be 
 " eligible to hold the offices of Lord Chancellor and Lord 
 Lieutenant of Ireland." So much were their protestations 
 of the last year worth ! 
 
 Moreover the provision of Sir R. Peel and Sir J. Graham, 
 of the year 1846, that judges, mayors, and sheriffs should 
 not attend mass in their robes of office, that is, as repre- 
 sentatives of the Sovereign, was repealed by the following 
 clause : " Every judicial and corporate officer shall attend 
 " his place of worship in his robes of office." 
 
 At the same time when this Bill was introduced, a Bill 
 was also presented to relieve all who hold office from 
 making the Declaration against Transubstantiation, the 
 1 Times, Aoril 24.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 35 
 
 Invocation of Saints, and the Sacrifice of the Mass. In 
 March, a Bill was brought forward to repeal the Ecclesi- 
 astical Titles Act. In April, a Bill to throw open to 
 priests the churchyards of the Established Church ; and 
 a Bill to provide glebe lands for Roman Catholic churches 
 and schools, which were to be held in perpetuity by the 
 Roman Catholic bishops. The Bill to relieve office-holders 
 from the Declaration was allowed to pass both Houses. 
 The Bill which granted lands to the Romanist bishops 
 was thrown out by Mr. Newdegate, on the ground that 
 it made the laity become mere slaves of the bishops. As 
 to the Office and Oaths Bill, the fourth clause was altered 
 and framed so as to extend Mr. Gladstone's Oaths Bill 
 to all persons holding office under the Crown. It swept 
 away the oath of the Queen's Supremacy, and substituted 
 a mere oath of allegiance ; while, to make this go down 
 with the House, a clause was inserted, recognising the 
 Protestant succession. Thus, in 1867, was the recognition 
 of the Queen's Supremacy got rid of. 
 
 In the year 1868, Cardinal Manning adroitly managed 
 that the Government of Mr. D'Israeli should accept a 
 simple oath of allegiance to the Queen, her heirs and 
 successors, without any reference whatever to the Protestant 
 succession. There only remains now to repeal the Acts of 
 William III. as "obsolete and offensive," so that the 
 English crown may, in the words of Cardinal Manning, be 
 openly and avowedly " reunited to Christendom by submis- 
 " sion to the living authority of the vicar of Jesus Christ." l 
 In that same book 2 Cardinal Manning observes : " If an 
 " heretical prince is elected or succeeds to the throne, the 
 " (Roman) Church has a right to say, ' / annul the election} 
 "or ' / forbid the succession' Or again, if the king of a 
 " Christian nation falls into heresy, he commits an offence 
 " against God. . . . Therefore it is in the power of the 
 " Roman Church, by virtue of the supreme authority with 
 " which she is invested by Christ over all Christian men, 
 '"Essays," p. 18. P. 458.
 
 36 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " to depose such a prince, in punishment of his spiritual 
 " crime, and to preserve his subjects from the danger of 
 " being led by his precept and example into heresy or 
 "spiritual rebellion." Such are the colours of Cardinal 
 Manning and the Roman Church ! And those colours are 
 nailed to the mast ; or, as Cardinal Manning expressed it : 1 
 " The Church cannot yield a jot or a tittle of its Divine 
 " laws of unity and truth. The world may renew its 
 " ten persecutions, but the pontiffs will be inflexible to 
 " the end. They have counselled, warned, and entreated 
 " princes and legislators. // rulers will not hear their voice, 
 " the people will (i.e. rebel). The pastors know their flocks, 
 " and their flocks know them. . . . The Church is nowhere 
 " more vigorous than where it is in closest sympathy with the 
 "people, as in Ireland and Poland, in America, Australia, 
 " and in England:' That is, powerful in proportion to its 
 Radicalism, Socialism, Fenianism, and Nihilism. 
 
 One more quotation from Cardinal Manning's essays 2 
 where he vaunts himself of his achievements : 
 " ROYAL SUPREMACY HAS PERISHED. . . . THE UNDYING 
 " AUTHORITY OF THE HOLY SEE IS ONCE MORE AN ACTIVE 
 " POWER IN ENGLAND. THE SHADOW OF PETER HAS 
 " FALLEN AGAIN UPON IT." He spoke there as if the 
 Queen were already a vassal of the Pope, and had sub- 
 mitted, like King John, King Charles I, King Charles II., 
 and James II., to the Pope's nuncio ! 
 
 Mr. D'Israeli was leader of the House of Commons in 
 
 1867 and 1868, and Prime Minister in 1868. The year 
 
 1868 was prolific in incidents and Bills in aid of the Roman 
 Church. On one occasion, in reference to the Poor Law, 
 Mr. Villiers and Sir Michael Beach, on opposite sides of 
 the House, "vied with each other in deference to Cardinal 
 ' Manning," and Sir Michael was highly indignant because 
 a Scotch Protestant should have ventured to petition the 
 
 1 " The Centenary of St. Peter : a Pastoral Letter to the Clergy," 
 p. 100. Longmans, 1867. 
 
 2 "Essays on Religion," 2nd Series, 1867. P. 20.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 37 
 
 House adversely to his eminence's views. As to the Bills 
 ope was to alter the words of the Coronation Oath ; but 
 Mr. Rearden was indiscreet and showed the Papal hand, 
 and Sir Colman O'Loghlen at once withdrew the new 
 clause which he had proposed to insert in the Promissory 
 Oaths Bill. 
 
 On March 21, 1867, Mr. McEvoy brought in a Bill, at 
 the bidding of Cardinal Manning, which the Irish prelates 
 thought premature. It proposed to give to the Pope the 
 power which is exercised by the Sovereign of England, 
 of determining the limits of dioceses, assigning them to 
 bishops, granting offices of authority, and of conferring 
 titles of honour. Mr. Gladstone sided with the Irish 
 bishops in thinking the introduction of the Bill to be 
 premature and imprudent, and he held that the caution 
 evinced by the Irish bishops did them the highest honour ; 
 " Nevertheless," said he, " as far as this side of the House 
 " is concerned, the hon. member will find little difficulty 
 " in the prosecution of his enterprise to a successful con- 
 ' elusion." Mr. Gladstone promised his support to a 
 measure enacting that which no English sovereign since 
 the days of the Norman Conquest had brooked, and which 
 William the Conqueror had successfully resisted. Mr. 
 Gladstone further expressed a hope that Mr. D'Israeli 
 would also help the Pope's intrigue : " If only the Govern- 
 " ment will support the hon. member, by all means let us 
 " go forward with the Bill." 
 
 The House of Commons, however, began to be uneasy 
 and suspicious of Mr. Gladstone's Romanizing tendencies, 
 and were not so docile as usual. A committee was ap- 
 pointed, and evidence was taken. The Right Hon. Spencer 
 Walpole drew up a report, which was not of an un-Protes- 
 tant character, and it was only lost by the casting vote 
 of the chairman, Mr. McEvoy, who was a Romanist. 
 
 In the year 1868, the grand attack, in comparison with 
 which those we have narrated were but affairs of outposts, 
 was preparing, and was led by Mr. Gladstone himself. It
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 was an attack planned long before by Cardinal Cullen and 
 Archbishop Manning, the attack on the Irish Church ; 
 but the Irish people, and even the Irish priests, showed not 
 the least sympathy with the movement. The Irish people 
 liked the Protestant clergy; for they were courteous gentle- 
 men, which their own priests were not ; and they were 
 always ready with their counsel, even with their money ; 
 in which matters they were in strong contrast to the 
 Romish priests. Even the Roman Catholic Dean of 
 Limerick, when summing up the grievances of Ireland, 
 was careful not to allude to the Established Church of 
 Ireland. He said: "We demand the liberation of our 
 "country from the domination of the people of England. 
 "We claim the land of our forefathers for the benefit of 
 "the people whose birthright it is, who have earned by 
 "the sweat of their brows the right to live upon, possess, 
 "and enjoy it." 
 
 The Roman Catholic Bishop of Meath, also, a short 
 time before, said : " The one, the great, the sole question 
 "for Ireland, is the Land Question. Other agitations, 
 " such as that against the Established Church, are got up 
 "for party purposes." 
 
 The grievance was, that the Irish "coveted and desired " 
 their neighbours' land. The Irish Church was not a 
 grievance. On the contrary, the quick-witted people 
 knew well enough that the Romish priest is always a 
 coarse-minded and rapacious tyrant; and that the presence 
 of the Protestant clergyman, with his eyes upon the 
 Romish priest, was a check on the latter in his exactions 
 and oppressions. It was the clergyman, not the priest, 
 who received, from the emigrants in America or our 
 Colonies, the sums they sent home for their relatives. For 
 this reason it was that Mr. Gladstone called the Protestant 
 Church "an alien Church," and sought its immediate de- 
 struction. Mr. Gladstone, in addressing his constituents, 
 said : " Those who endangered the Union of Ireland, were 
 "the party that maintained there an alien Church." On
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 39 
 
 being asked for an explanation by Mr. Rankin, of Mid- 
 lothian, Mr. Gladstone wrote that his "expression was 
 " strictly accurate, because the Irish Church was of alien, 
 "that is, of English growth, . . . and had been 
 " absolutely forced upon the country by the strictly alien 
 " power of England." l Mr. Gladstone forgot that Roman- 
 ism had been forced upon them by the Bull of Pope 
 Adrian, by which he bestowed Protestant Ireland on 
 England, at that time Papist. But we must revert to a 
 previous year. 
 
 It was in March, 1865, when all the preliminaries 
 between Archbishop Manning and Mr. Gladstone had 
 been completed (as we shall subsequently show), that the 
 Liberation Society and Mr. Dillwyn, the member for 
 Swansea, brought forward a motion against the Irish 
 Church, which was seconded by The O'Donoghue. It 
 was this occasion that was used by Mr. Gladstone for 
 declaring that he had broken loose from all the principles 
 that had hitherto been supposed to have governed his 
 conduct. Sir George Grey opposed Mr. Dillwyn's motion, 
 on the part of the Liberal party ; but Mr. Gladstone, who 
 followed him in the debate, declared himself in favour of 
 abolishing the Established Church. On June 20, The 
 O'Donoghue proposed a motion for assistance to a Rom- 
 ish College in Ireland which was governed by Romish 
 bishops. The Liberal party were averse to the proposal, 
 and even denounced it. Mr. Gladstone supported it in 
 vehement and passionate language, as if he were the leader 
 of the Pope's Brass Band. 
 
 In 1866, the Fenian sedition was brought to the front, 
 in order to prepare the way for the disestablishment of 
 the Irish Church, and the confiscation of the properties of 
 the Protestant landlords. Mr. Bright presented a petition 
 in favour of the Fenian prisoners ; and the petition which 
 he read, "described Ireland as kept in a state of hopeless 
 "subjection, in order to maintain the interests of the Irish 
 1 Times, March 26, 1880
 
 40 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "Church Establishment, and a system of land tenure at 
 "variance with the feelings and interests of the people; 
 " and, in consequence of the utter hopelessness of a remedy 
 "for the evils under which they suffer, honourable Irish- 
 " men, however mistaken, feel justified in resorting to force; 
 "and, in a word, there are legitimate grounds for the 
 " chronic discontent of which Fenianism is the expression ; 
 "and, therefore, some palliation for the errors of the 
 " Fenians." 
 
 No. VIII. 
 
 ON May 6, 1867, Sir John Gray, who owed his popularity 
 in Ireland to his conviction and imprisonment for treason, 
 was designated to propose a motion to the House of 
 Commons, in favour of the disestablishment and disendow- 
 ment of the Irish Church. Sir John Gray explained the 
 circumstances in a letter to the Bishop of Kilkenny, dated 
 Aug. 21, 1868. He said that the Irish Roman Catholic 
 members " were good enough, at their Conference in 1865, 
 " to confide the Church question to my care/' He then 
 proceeded as I have already mentioned : " I resolved to 
 "open direct communication with Mr. Gladstone. You 
 " never can know, for even were I at liberty to detail what 
 " occurred at the several private interviews with which I 
 " was favoured, I would not have the power adequately to 
 " convey to you a just impression of the generous, earnest, 
 " and hearty devotion with which Mr. Gladstone determined 
 " to pledge his future as a statesman to the redress of this 
 " great wrong ; " and so forth. On that occasion, Mr. 
 Gladstone again spoke the principles of a Romanist, with 
 the bitterness of a pervert. Mr. Gladstone had formerly 
 upheld the Established Church, and refused to endow 
 Maynooth. He now turned upon those who continued to 
 hold those principles, and asked how they could support 
 the Protestant Church on the ground of truth, while 
 they paid a priesthood whom they regarded as teachers of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 41 
 
 falsehood, and who certainly taught that no truth was to 
 be found in the Protestant Church ? 
 
 How was it that Mr. Gladstone lent himself to this 
 scheme of disestablishment ? Was it through inadvertence 
 or through ignorance ? No ! The previous year the Duke 
 of Argyll (June 24, 1867) quoted the words of the Romish 
 Bishop Moriarty, of Limerick : " We must bear in mind 
 " that the Catholic Church is the rightful owner of all 
 " ecclesiastical property in this country (Ireland), with the 
 " exception of what the Protestant Church may have ac- 
 " quired since its separation." He added that " there was 
 " no power to alienate it, or to demand its secularisation, 
 " unless with the sanction of the Pope, who is by Christ 
 " appointed the supreme ruler of our great spiritual 
 " Commonwealth." 
 
 The next year (1868), the great attack on the Church 
 was delivered. Mr. Bright announced at Limerick, on 
 July 14, the next move to be made by Mr. Gladstone after 
 the Irish Church should have been disestablished : " The 
 "only true and lasting remedy for Irish discontent is to 
 " be found, either in the repeal of the Act of Union, or in 
 " absolute independence. I blame nobody for holding this 
 " opinion. ... I am willing to admit, that any nation, 
 " believing it to be its interest, has a right both to wish for 
 " and to strive for national independence." 
 
 There are but two more preliminary considerations to 
 which it is necessary to allude before we pass to a detailed 
 examination of the course of legislation in recent years : 
 the first bears on a characteristic of the Irish Roman 
 Catholic people and priests ; the second relates to the 
 Vatican, which uses people and priests as its instruments 
 and tools, in the prosecution of its secret designs. 
 
 Let us go back to 1843, and see the characteristic trait 
 of the Irish people and priests. It was the same then as 
 history shows that it had been for two hundred years 
 before ; the same as contemporary facts prove it to be now. 
 On May 14 of that year, Dr. Higgins, the Romish Bishop
 
 4 2 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 of Ardagh, said : " I have every reason to believe I may 
 "add that I know that every Catholic bishop in Ireland, 
 " without any exception, is an ardent repealer." 
 
 Sir Charles Trevelyan l wrote : " There cannot be a 
 " doubt that the great body of the Roman Catholic priests 
 " have gone into the (Repeal) movement in the worst, that 
 " is, in the most rebellious sense ; some, more hardy and 
 " enthusiastic than the rest, might even lead their flocks to 
 " battle." 
 
 Dr. M'Hale, the Romish Archbishop of Tuam, and one 
 hundred and five priests 2 " Resolved : That we commence 
 " the New Year by enrolling ourselves members of the 
 " Repeal Association." The bishop and clergy of the ex- 
 tensive diocese of Cloyne and Ross took up the same 
 rebellious policy ; 3 and their address was signed also by 
 the bishop and one hundred and forty priests of the County 
 Cork ; by the bishop and priests of the County Water- 
 ford ; and by the bishop and priests of the diocese 
 of Meath. Well did the Times 41 announce that: "The 
 "' Roman Catholic clergy have resumed their old position 
 "of political as well as spiritual pastors of the people. 
 " They are to be found at every meeting. At Derry nearly 
 " every second speaker was a priest. The same maybe said 
 "of Limerick, Tipperary, and Galway, where the most 
 "inflammatory language was uttered by those reverend 
 " gentlemen, in the presence of monster assemblages, ripe 
 "and ready to commit themselves to open insurrection 
 " against the Queen's authority." For an example of the 
 current opinions of the Romish priesthood, we may quote 
 what the Rev. Mr. Birmingham wrote in the Nation? a 
 newspaper read by most of the Irish people : " When the 
 " day of your struggle shall come, when your liberties as well 
 " as your lives shall be invaded, then let it not be a turning 
 " out of two or three counties, but let Ireland rise to the 
 " contest as one man, and let every man make a vow to the 
 
 1 Morning Chronicle, Oct. 18, 1843. 2 Times, Jan. 3, 1848. 
 
 3 April 15, 1848. 4 April 8, 1848. 8 April 14, 1848.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 43 
 
 " following effect : ' / vow, before God and my country, to 
 ' ' lessen, if I can, by one man at least, tJie enemies of my 
 "' native land, and to die!" That is, I vow before God to 
 murder at least one Englishman and to swing for it. 
 Pass down the stream of time for twenty years. The same 
 characteristic presents itself. Archbishop M'Hale and his 
 priests met at Castlebar, County Mayo, 1 and " Resolved : 
 " To give our strenuous support to those candidates only 
 " who can advocate the fullest measure of tenant-right, un- 
 " qualified freedom of Catholic denominational education, 
 " the disestablishment and disendowment of the Protestant 
 " Church, and, above all, the Repeal of the Legislative Union." 
 
 A few years before, 2 Dr. Butler, the Romish Bishop of 
 Limerick, said : " We have neither love nor liking for the 
 " English Government in its dealings with the Irish race ; 
 " and we would look on any struggle which would raise 
 " Ireland to the dignity of a nation as an effort that 
 "every good man is bound to aid and encourage." 
 
 The Roman Catholic Archdeacon O'Brien, the founder 
 of the Young Men's Catholic Associations, preaching in 
 the Roman Catholic Chapel of Newcastle West, County 
 Limerick, on Feb. I2, 3 said: "We say, we do not alone 
 " look for the abolition of the Church temporalities ; but 
 " we are looking for the power of making our own laws. I 
 " say, we are far in advance of the Dublin Association ; we 
 "go for Repeal of the Union. We have the sanction of the 
 "primates and prelates ; and we have the approbation of 
 " the Bishop of Limerick, whose heart is with us. Resolved : 
 " That we take measures for a great aggregate meeting 
 " in Newcastle West, on Sunday, the 5th of March ; and 
 " on that day we will once again have flung the ancient 
 "standard (of England) to the winds for God and our 
 " country." 
 
 On Dec. 23, 1867, we find Dr. O'Brien, Vicar-General 
 and Dean of Limerick, heading a declaration of upwards 
 
 1 Freeman's Journal, Aug. 8, 1868. * Munster News, April 6, 1864. 
 3 Ibid., Feb. 15, 1865.
 
 44 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 of thirty Romish priests in favour of " a restoration of the 
 " blessings of domestic legislation" \ and adding, "We believe 
 " solemnly and sincerely that this concession, which is per- 
 " fectly within the constitution, and fully compatible with 
 " the integrity of the Empire and the security of the 
 " Crown, would have the like happy results in Ireland that 
 " have signally attended a similar adjustment recently in 
 "Hungary." If they thought it "perfectly within the 
 " constitution," it is a curious fact that, in the spring of 
 1848, a loyal declaration in favour of the constitution was 
 signed by the clergy of all the Protestant denominations, 
 while " every Catholic priest in Kerry, except two or three, 
 " declined to sign it ; and it was sent to the County Cork, 
 " and only one priest signed it " ; while not a single 
 Roman Catholic priest in Ulster would sign it : so said 
 Father Sullivan. 
 
 At the Rotunda meeting in Dublin, on Jan. 25, 1869, 
 in favour of the Fenian prisoners, Mr. Butt fully admitted 
 that they were rebels ; but he pleaded that their wrongs 
 excused revolution. To this meeting one Roman Catholic 
 archbishop and five bishops sent letters of sympathy and 
 adhesion. Lastly, the famous Father Lavelle, when 
 lecturing in Dublin, " on the Catholic doctrine of the right 
 " of revolution," explained the principle of action and 
 conduct of the Romish prelates and priests to be the 
 principles of the Jesuits, which Pascal so ably exposed, 1 
 namely : " Oppressive rulers may be deposed by their 
 " subjects ; " he added his opinion that " no subjects are 
 " more oppressed than the Irish ; therefore, we have the 
 "indisputable right to set the English Government aside; 
 " but at this moment it would be madness or wickedness to 
 " make the attempt, because resistance to that Government 
 " would be useless" 
 
 So much for the aims which have for so many years 
 been steadily kept in view by the Romish Hierarchy in 
 Ireland. Neither Mr. Gladstone nor any one else could 
 1 Tablet, Aug. 8, 1863.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 45 
 
 plead ignorance of their intentions ; and if he can be 
 shown to have, for more than a score of years, been their 
 steady supporter and ardent fautor, what are we to think 
 of him or his policy ? Let him not shield himself behind 
 a proposition, that he " desires to govern Ireland according 
 " to Irish ideas," and that it is a ruler's duty to give to a 
 people all that the majority ask for ; because he does not 
 hold that general proposition in any but the particular 
 case of the Irish. Great Britain rules many nations and 
 peoples, black and white, Africans, Indians, and New 
 Zealanders ; and men of many religions, Brahmins, Bud- 
 dhists, Mahommedans ; but not to any of those peoples or 
 religions does he apply that principle, except to the Roman 
 Catholics of Ireland. 
 
 Now consider the other point the character of the 
 Roman Curia, to which the Romish bishops all over the 
 world have sworn implicit obedience, just as the priests 
 also have sworn entire submission to their bishops. The 
 Church of Rome is, in fact, not a body of theological 
 doctrine or belief, but a huge and intricate system of 
 government. It is an empire ; it is an absolute monarchy, 
 with its College of Cardinals or Privy Councillors a 
 monarchy which rules not only by means of force, and 
 which governs not only the bodies and outward actions of 
 its subjects ; but which rules the conscience by means of 
 spiritual terrors, and insures the most abject obedience by 
 means of superstitious feelings. As a study of the Syllabus 
 of Dec. 8, 1864, will show, the Papal Government is a con- 
 spiracy of the subtlest and best informed minds, against the 
 fortunes and liberties of mankind. It has agents in every 
 land and every nation ; for every priest, every monk, every 
 nun, every member of a religious confraternity, is an 
 agent of that Government. And every one of these the 
 whole body indeed of the Romanists move as one army, 
 in accordance with the orders from the Vatican. By all 
 the allurements of sense ; by the feigned terrors of the 
 unseen world ; by artifices nicely calculated on an intimate
 
 46 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 acquaintance with each man's idiosyncrasies, tendencies, 
 antecedents, and present frame of mind ; by the power 
 acquired through the knowledge of some secret crime ; by 
 enticing young persons of mark to commit themselves, in 
 perpetrating some disgraceful act, so that their fair name 
 and fame, their honour and their liberties are placed in the 
 hands of the agents of Rome ; by memories of the past, 
 and poignant stings of remorse ; by offers of preferment, 
 office, glory and fame, with assurances of safety and secresy 
 in exchange for services rendered clandestinely to Rome ; 
 by all these means, and many others, the Vatican is ever 
 increasing, in every land, its body of adherents, who must 
 implicitly obey, while they hate her. Nor can honour or 
 patriotism, or even family affection, intervene. Conscience 
 is goaded, and oaths compel them to discard the laws and 
 the welfare of their nation, with the love of kindred, the 
 entreaties of a wife, the paternal instincts of a father for 
 his children, in order to submit to and obey the mandates 
 of the Pope. 
 
 The system of the Church of Rome is a wonderful 
 mechanism. Its centre is the Pope. Yet it is independent 
 of the Pope. Many a Pope has been a dotard ; very many 
 have been debauchees. Yet the machine works on, irre- 
 spectively of his idiosyncrasies. It is the Cabinet, the Privy 
 Council, the College of Cardinals that governs. That 
 body never dies. One old man and another falls away, 
 like a sere and yellow leaf, but the tree remains; the 
 traditions and the knowledge of centuries are still there. 
 The records of the past are added to the daily experience 
 of the present ; and that experience is being ever gathered 
 in every corner of the earth, wherever there is a priest or 
 a missioner. From every race, from every land, from 
 every people, nay, from every family, there stretches a 
 telegraphic wire of secret intelligence to the central station 
 of the Vatican. There the intelligence is used by free 
 minds, who are destitute of family, without all the affections 
 which are natural to man, without a country or a home,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 47 
 
 without patriotism ; without restraint of obligations, oaths, 
 moral principles or Divine laws ; because the word of the 
 Pope is supposed to tear those holy fetters away as gossamer 
 webs, and priestly absolution is held to wash out even the 
 slightest taint of sin. That is right which is done to 
 advance the power of the Pope. That is true which the 
 Pope may please to assert ex cathedrd. That which favours 
 the interest of the Church is good. Even crime is commend- 
 able if it be done for the Church. Coleridge, the poet and 
 philosopher, said that there are two kinds of strong persons, 
 who must always prevail over men that vary in their aims, 
 and sometimes move in one direction and sometimes in 
 another : he is strong who acts always in accordance with 
 the will of God, and allows no consideration, no passion, 
 and no interest to make him deviate from the path of 
 rectitude and simple justice ; and he, too, is strong who 
 puts before himself one end, to which he constantly aims 
 without swerving to one side or the other, allowing no con- 
 siderations of right and wrong, no soft or benevolent 
 feeling, no passion, no natural affection, to intervene or deter. 
 Forti niJiil difficile. The latter succeeds in this world, the 
 former lives for eternity. Hence the success, for centuries, 
 of the Vatican. Emperors have resisted it, and fallen. 
 Ministers have framed their policies to curb the pretensions 
 of the Pope, and have been overcome. The devices of 
 premiers are weak, in opposition to the intrigues of the 
 Curia. The advance of the Papacy has always been as the 
 advance of the plague, irresistible, unsparing, remorseless, 
 and deadly. Its myriads of secret agents overmatch armies 
 and dispose of their generals. Its purposes are " fathom- 
 " less as the sea, and silent as the grave." Its action is in 
 every state, setting nation to hamper nation, and exciting 
 one statesman against another ; breaking up, dividing, 
 crumbling its enemies ; while its own party is always 
 united, conspiring everywhere towards one object. Ever 
 victorious, it will triumph until the great hour for the doom 
 of the harlot, which sits upon the nations of the earth, has
 
 4 8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 struck ; until the warning voice has been heard through 
 the world : " Come out of her, my people, that ye be not 
 "partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her 
 " plagues, for her sins have reached unto heaven, and God 
 "hath remembered her iniquities. . . . For she saith 
 " in her heart : I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall 
 " see no sorrow. Therefore shall her plagues come in one 
 " day, death, and mourning, and famine ; and she shall be 
 "utterly burned with fire, for strong is the Lord who 
 " judgeth her. And the kings of the earth, who have com- 
 " mitted fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall 
 " bewail her and lament for her, when they shall see the 
 "smoke of her burning, standing afar off for fear of her 
 "torment." 
 
 No. IX. 
 
 I HAVE shown that the same end was pursued by Mr. 
 Gladstone and Mr. D' Israeli, for the benefit of the Roman 
 Catholics of Ireland namely, the Disestablishment of the 
 Church of England in Ireland. But there was a divergence 
 between those statesmen, in the means by which they pro- 
 posed to attain that end : Mr. Disraeli's plan found favour 
 with the Jesuits and the Court of Rome ; Mr. Gladstone's 
 was powerfully supported by Cardinal Manning, Cardinal 
 Cullen, and the Irish bishops. Mr. D'Israeli intended to 
 begin by putting all the education of Ireland, higher and 
 lower, on " a religious basis ; " that is to say, he wished to 
 put it into the hands of the adherents of the Jesuits. Then 
 he intended to abolish the Protestant Church in Ireland, 
 by the process of " levelling up ; " that is to say, he wanted 
 to hand over to the Roman Catholic Church its due pro- 
 portion of the revenues, the tithes, the lands, and the 
 buildings which had been devoted to the furtherance of 
 the Protestant religion. After Mr. D'Israeli's plan had 
 been submitted to the Pope and approved, Mr. Gladstone, 
 Cardinal Manning, and Cardinal Cullen, persuaded the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 49 
 
 Irish bishops that Mr. D'Israeli's mode of disestablishment 
 would result in turning the Irish priests into " paid ser- 
 vants of the State." This was not true. As the priests 
 were to have had the revenues, lands, and buildings secured 
 to them, they would not have been dependent on the will 
 of the State for the receipt of their stipends. It would, 
 however, have had another effect ; it would have made the 
 priests independent of the will and favour of their congre- 
 gations ; it would have enabled the priesthood to have set 
 a resolute face against all revolutionary projects. It would 
 have made it the interest of the priests to resist all distur- 
 bances and revolutionary agitations. The priests are now 
 entirely dependent on the will of their congregations for 
 receiving anything at all ; and they are therefore, to a man, 
 the abettors of the Nationalist party. The priests are the 
 paid servants of the people ; that is, they are the lackeys 
 of the revolution. The bishops and the priests have to go 
 in for all the revolutionary projects which the Fenians 
 persuade the people to embrace ; because the priest that 
 hangs back receives no more fees, nor offerings, and has 
 to starve. Therefore the priests are the foremost revolu- 
 tionists ; and it is not without reason that Dr. Nulty, the 
 Romanist Bishop of Meath, has warned the Pope that 
 " grave and dangerous complications and misunderstand- 
 ings might at any moment crop up between the Irish 
 " nation and the Holy See." He reminded the Pope that 
 " great Catholic nations " have, from time to time, " apos- 
 " tatized from the faith," and he professed his inability to 
 "see any solid grounds for believing in a special exceptional 
 " Providence which would save Irish multitudes, any more 
 " than Irish individuals, from renouncing their allegiance to 
 " the Church." On those grounds he cautioned the Pope 
 to side with the people, in furthering the revolutionary 
 projects of Nationalism. 
 
 There was, at the time of the Disestablishment of the 
 Irish Church, an instructive letter published by a Roman 
 Catholic, who was on terms of considerable intimacy with 
 
 E
 
 50 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Mr. Gladstone. The writer said : "At the very time 
 " Cardinal Cullen was thus praising his Liberal leader (Mr. 
 " Gladstone), the Holy See entertained the utmost distrust 
 " of Mr. Gladstone's Liberalism. Both Cardinal Cullen and 
 " Archbishop Manning were warned that the support they 
 " were giving, as ecclesiastics, to the great Liberal scheme 
 " of secularizing religious property in Ireland, was a mistake, 
 " and that the language some Catholics used on behalf of 
 " Gladstone's disendowment measure, was almost heretical. 
 " In extenuation of the conduct of these two prelates, it 
 "was represented at Rome that they were not acting as 
 " ecclesiastics, but simply as politicians ; that Archbishop 
 " Manning was born and bred a Liberal ; that he was one 
 ' ; of the most intimate friends of the Liberal Leader (Mr. 
 " Gladstone), and that on this question he could not break 
 " from him and his party. Similarly it was alleged in 
 "defence of Cardinal Cullen, that he was a Liberal by 
 " birth and connections ; and that there were exceptional 
 " reasons, of a purely Irish character, why religious 
 " property should be secularized in that country. . . . 
 " But beyond an article in the Osservatore Romano which 
 " indeed Mr. Gladstone quoted as a proof that the Pope 
 "preferred concurrent endowment no public utterance 
 " was made in Rome." Of course Mr. Disraeli's plan of 
 levelling up would have put vast wealth into the hands 
 of- the Roman Catholics. On June 29th, 1872, Cardinal 
 Manning wrote, in reference to Mr. Gladstone's scheme for 
 the Disestablishment of the Protestant Church in Ireland, 
 the following letter : " The more I think of it, the more I 
 " am convinced that it was the right way to begin. But it 
 is now both formally and morally too late [for levelling 
 up]. I am sorry." 
 
 The fallacy, which had been invented in order to thwart 
 Mr. DTsraeli's plan of Disestablishment namely, that the 
 priests would become the paid servants of the State was 
 eminently successful. Mr. DTsraeli had introduced into the 
 House of Commons, in 1868, the plan of University educa-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 tion in Ireland which had been approved by the Pope ; 
 and had stated his intention of "levelling up," in accordance 
 with a plan settled between Lord Mayo, Bishop Leahy and 
 Cardinal Manning and himself. Mr. Gladstone met this 
 by resolutions in favour of an immediate disestablishment 
 of the Irish Church and the secularization of the Protestant 
 ecclesiastical property. Mr. D'Israeli was defeated ; and 
 the general election of December resulted in a minority for 
 his party. Mr. D'Israeli was naturally much incensed that 
 Cardinal Manning should have ejected him from power, 
 on a measure which had received the Pope's and his own 
 sanction : and Mr. D'Israeli allowed his indignation to be 
 known. Cardinal Manning then sent the Duke of Norfolk 
 and another Roman Catholic to pacify Mr. D'Israeli. 
 The incensed Achilles spoke angrily, and complained that 
 he had been doing all he could for the Roman Catholics, 
 and " had, by them, been stabbed in the back." The depu- 
 tation, perceiving the inutility of their mission, withdrew. 
 As they descended the stairs, Mr. D'Israeli came out of 
 his room, and looking over the banisters, cried out, " You 
 " know whom I mean, gentlemen ; I mean Manning." 
 Subsequently ' Cardinal Manning requested me to "make 
 " up the quarrel ; " but as the Cardinal's terms involved 
 absolute "submission " on the part of Mr. D'Israeli, it was 
 plainly useless to attempt it. Mr. D'Israeli then, on March 
 22, 1871, commissioned me to go to Rome and see Cardinal 
 Antonelli and the Pope upon the subject. The following 
 notes which I took, of that which Mr. D'Israeli directed me 
 to say, will suffice to indicate Mr. D'Israeli's views : "While 
 " Mr. D'Israeli was in office up to the beginning of the year 
 " 1859, he directed his energies to defeating the plans of 
 '' the Italian revolutionists ; and that was the cause of the 
 " adverse motion of Lord Hartington, which ejected Mr. 
 " D'Israeli from power. On that occasion the Irish mem- 
 " bers voted against Mr. D'Israeli. In the general election 
 " which succeeded, the Roman Catholics likewise went 
 " against Mr. D'Israeli and supported Lord PalmerstoB.
 
 52 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " The result was the unity of Italy. In 1868 Mr. D'Israeli, 
 " as Premier, and Lord Mayo, the Irish Secretary, had re- 
 " peated interviews with Archbishop Manning and Bishop 
 " Leahy, and arranged a scheme of education for Ireland 
 " which Archbishop Manning took to Rome. It was fully 
 " approved of by the Pope and Court of Rome. Mr. D'Israeli, 
 " then, with great labour in educating his followers, made 
 " sure of the support of all his party ; Archbishop Manning, 
 " on the other hand, saw Mr. Gladstone every day, and ar- 
 " ranged with him concerning the support of the Liberal op- 
 position. Then Mr. D'Israeli launched the Bill. With what 
 " result ? Not an Irishman' spoke. Mr. Gladstone refrained 
 " from raising his voice in favour of the Bill. For fourteen 
 " days Mr. Gladstone sat in silence, and Mr. D'Israeli waited 
 " for the promised support. In the meanwhile Mr. Bright 
 " and the Secularists, accompanied by Mr. Monsell, went 
 " to Mr. Gladstone and said : The only thing to be done 
 " to save the Liberal party is to destroy the Protestant 
 " Church in Ireland. Mr. Gladstone then went to Arch- 
 " bishop Manning, and the view of the Secularists was 
 " adopted as the policy of the Romanist party. The result 
 " was that Mr. D'Israeli was turned out of office, and the 
 " property of the Irish Church was secularized." Mr. D'Is- 
 raeli added, at this point, the following words: " And yet 
 " the Catholics obtained nothing of the Irish Church revenues, 
 " which were really theirs ; nor yet did they get into their 
 "hands the education of Ireland ; and they broke faith with 
 "me, and disestablished the Pope." He continued: "If 
 " they had trusted to me they would have first obtained De- 
 " nominational Education, and a CatJwlic University ; and 
 " then the Irish CJntrcJi would have given way to what was 
 " called levelling up, in accordance with my speech of the 
 "year 1844." 
 
 On the 2nd of April I had an audience of an hour and 
 a half with Cardinal Antonelli, and said to him what Mr. 
 D'Israeli had directed. Cardinal Antonelli surprised me 
 by the warmth with which he spoke of Mr. D'Israeli, and of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 53 
 
 his policy in supporting the temporal power of the Pope, 
 and of his speech on the Irish Church in 1844. I pointed 
 out to him that the Irish Church had been so disestablished 
 as to give place to atheism, and without restoring to the 
 Roman Catholic Church the endowments which had been 
 taken from her at the Reformation ; and I said that Mr. 
 D'Israeli would have done all this, had he not been betrayed, 
 and stabbed in the back by Archbishop Manning and Car- 
 dinal Cullen. He then said to me : " You are surely not 
 " desiring us to pass a definite condemnation on those who 
 " assisted in disestablishing the Protestant Church ? " 
 
 No. X. 
 
 WHAT was Mr. D'Israeli's speech of 1844, to which he 
 made allusion, in his message to Cardinal Antonelli, and 
 with which Cardinal Antonelli showed that he was in- 
 timately acquainted? In the third edition of Mr. D'Israeli's 
 speeches, published in 1873, there will be found his speech 
 of March 16, 1868, in which he twice drew attention to 
 his speech of 1844. First he said, "in my conscience the 
 " sentiment of that speech was right ; " and then he said : 
 " in my historic conscience I say it was true." That was 
 while Mr. D'Israeli was in office, in 1868. In the same 
 volume, his speech of 1844 will be also found. On that 
 occr.sion he used these words : " I ventured to lay down, 
 "as a principle, that the Government of Ireland should 
 "be on a system the reverse of England, and should be 
 " centralized (i.e. in Dublin). . . . These are Tory 
 " principles, the natural principles of the Democracy of 
 " England. They may not be the principles of those 
 "consistent gentlemen whose fathers bled in England for 
 " Charles I., and who now would support, in Ireland, the 
 "tyranny established by Oliver Cromwell. . . . Let us 
 " recur to the benignant policy of Charles I. ; then we
 
 54 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " may settle Ireland with honour to ourselves, with kind- 
 " ness to the people, and with safety to the realm." Mr. 
 D'Israeli had just before explained that, in the time of 
 Charles I., " there was a parliament in Dublin, called by 
 "a Protestant king, and presided over by a Protestant 
 "viceroy. . . . Yet the majority of the members of 
 " that Parliament were Roman Catholics." Charles I. 
 was a Protestant only in name. A Jesuit 1 has published 
 some of the archives in the Vatican, proving incontestibly 
 that he was a Roman Catholic ; and Charles determined 
 that his son Charles II. should be married to a Romanist. 
 Mr. D'Israeli continued : " the Government was, at that 
 " time, carried on by a Council of State, presided over by 
 " a Protestant Deputy ; yet many of the members of that 
 " Council were Roman Catholics. The Municipalities were 
 " then full of Roman Catholics. Several of the Sheriffs, 
 " also, were Roman Catholics ; and a very considerable 
 "number of magistrates were Roman Catholics." Mr. 
 D'Israeli then quoted from Sir W. Brereton's travels to 
 prove that : " the social and political features of Ireland 
 ". . . exhibited the most perfect civil and political 
 " equality, the Government of the country being in general 
 " carried on by Roman Catholic subjects." He continued : 
 " Did not Mr. Pitt, the last of Tory statesmen, propose 
 " measures for the settlement of Ireland, which, had they 
 " been agreed to by Parliament, would have saved Ireland 
 " from her present condition ? " The measures to which 
 Mr. D'Israeli alluded, were those which Mr. Gladstone 
 also mentioned, the endowment of the Roman Catholic 
 Church, and of Roman Catholic seminaries. Mr. D'Israeli 
 continued : " You would have had the Roman Catholics 
 " of Ireland emancipated at a very early period ; and you 
 " would have had the Church question, too, settled at a very 
 "early period" Having remarked that any one would 
 
 1 Istoria della conversione, alia Chiesa Cattolica, di Carlo II., Re 
 d'Inghilterra. Giuseppe Boerio, S. J., 1863; and see Cabbala sive 
 Scrinia Sacra. London, 1691, p. 203.
 
 LLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 55 
 
 think and exclaim that " TJie Remedy is Revolution" he 
 added : " What, then, is the duty of an English Minister? 
 " To effect, by his policy, all those changes -which a Revolution 
 " would do by force. That is the Irish question in its in- 
 " tegrity. It is quite evident that, to effect this, we must 
 " have an Executive in Ireland, which shall bear a much 
 "nearer relation to the leading classes and character of 
 " the country than it does at present." The effects of 
 that Popish Revolution, which Mr. D'Israeli made his 
 policy, have been accomplished by Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 It was not long after the publication of those speeches 
 (on September 27, 1876), that an Irish Roman Catholic 
 gentleman, who was profoundly versed in politics, and in- 
 timately acquainted with the aims and workings of the 
 Jesuits and their adherents, announced to me that Mr. 
 Gladstone was "as good a Catholic as Mr. D'Israeli;" that 
 Mr. Gladstone had written his "Vatican Decrees" and 
 other pamphlets, as a blind (so he said) just as he had 
 made three appointments, of Protestant gentlemen, two of 
 whom now hold offices, as a blind ; that Mr. D'Israeli had 
 been much hampered by the Protestantism in his Cabinet, 
 and party ; and that Mr. D' Israeli's aim was to break up 
 the Conservative party, just as Mr. Gladstone's effort was 
 to break up the Liberal party ; so that a new party 
 should be formed. As an example of this, he pointed 
 to the then recent speech of Mr. D'Israeli on September 
 20, 1876. Thus was explained the slow process of the 
 disintegration of both parties, which has been going on 
 for many years, and to which further allusions will be 
 made hereafter. The Tory party has been broken up by 
 the Tory leader, and the Liberal party has been discom- 
 fited and disgraced by the Liberal leader. 
 
 In that speech of 1844, Mr. D'Israeli spoke of his "Tory 
 " Democracy." What was that Tory Democracy, and 
 what was the " Young England " party, but a scheme for 
 re-introducing Romanism ? It is all explained in " Con- 
 " ingsby " and " Tancred " and " Sybil," for those who
 
 5 6 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 take the trouble to read between the lines. There he 
 inveighs against "the Parliamentary Church which has 
 "made religion disbelieved." There he complains that 
 " Holy Church has been transferred into a National Es- 
 " tablishment." There he advocates " the divorce of the 
 " Church from the State ; " although he subsequently ex- 
 pressed his firm belief that the divorce of the Church from 
 the State would be the destruction of Protestantism. The 
 Protestantism of some of Mr. Disraeli's Parliamentary 
 professions, must not blind us to the implied Romanism 
 of his fictions. In his fictions he could successfully ^urge 
 arguments in favour of Romanism, which still remain in 
 the minds of his readers ; in his Parliamentary professions 
 he could announce principles and save his credit. In his 
 novels he urged the destruction of the English Church, 
 and its " mitred nullities," as he called the bishops. In a 
 public speech on June 17, 1868, he could "venture to 
 " say this : That if the Church of England were to fall, 
 " the Protestant Church of Europe would receive a wound 
 " from which it would probably never recover." On June 
 24, 1872, he proclaimed his principle to be the follow- 
 ing :_ The principles of Liberty, of Order, of Law, and 
 "of Religion, ought not to be entrusted to individual 
 " opinions," a denial of the right of private judgment, 
 " nor to the caprice and passions of the multitude," the 
 objection against a Parliamentary Church, " but should 
 " be embodied in a form of permanence and power," on 
 the principle of Papal Infallibility. 
 
 Before pursuing this subject, let us return for a moment 
 to Mr. Gladstone's disestablishment of the Protestant 
 Church in Ireland. He had for some time entertained the 
 intention of accomplishing that feat, and yearned for the 
 glory of success. He could not bear that another should 
 carry off the palm of victory. On December 30, 1879, 
 Mr. Gladstone wrote to Mr. Irving : " In 1865, I denounced 
 "it (the Anglican Church in Ireland) in the House of 
 " Commons, but saw no preparation in the public mind to 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 57 
 
 "entertain the question. The two signal outrages in 1867, 
 " (the Manchester murders and the Clerkenwell explosion,) 
 " drew attention to it. That attention was the only thing 
 "lacking." As his own determination to destroy that 
 Church was not lacking, he hurried to the accomplishment 
 of his purpose. In his Midlothian campaign he confessed 
 that his desire to destroy the Protestant Church was not 
 shared by the -Irish nation. He said, on Nov. 26, 1869 : 
 " What happened in the case of the Irish Church down to 
 "the year 1865, and the dissolution of that year? The 
 " whole question of the Irish Church was dead. Nobody cared 
 "for it. Nobody paid attention to it in England. Circum- 
 " stances occurred which drew the attention of the people 
 " to the Irish Church. I had, in 1865, said I believed it 
 " was out of the range of practical politics. Now it came 
 " to this a gaol in the heart of the metropolis was broken 
 "open in circumstances which drew the attention of the 
 "English people to the "state of Ireland; and when a 
 " Manchester policeman was murdered in the execution of 
 " his duty, at once the whole country became alive to the 
 "question of the Irish Church. It came within the range 
 " of practical politics ; I myself took it up, and proposed 
 " resolutions to the House of Commons declaring the view 
 "of the House that the Irish Church should no longer 
 "exist as a national Church." 
 
 But Sir John Acton, now Lord Acton, a Roman Catholic, 
 said to his constituents at Bridgenorth, on Nov. 2, 1868, that 
 Mr. Gladstone had not " suddenly changed his views upon 
 " the Irish Church question when he saw his opportunity "; 
 and Sir J. Acton added that " he had been perfectly aware 
 "of this change in Mr. Gladstone's views, as early as 1864." 
 Mr. Gladstone's friend, Sir Roundell Palmer, now Earl of 
 Selborne, speaking at Richmond on Aug. 21, 1868, said : 
 "In the year 1863, at a time when no one was bringing 
 " forward this question, or seemed very likely to do so, Mr. 
 "Gladstone told me privately that he had made up his 
 "mind on the subject."
 
 5 8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Sir John Pope Hennessy, the Governor of Hong-Kong, 
 a Roman Catholic, and a staunch friend of the Jesuits, 
 wrote in the Contemporary Review of July, 1875, the fol- 
 lowing words : " The present paper does not propose to 
 "deal with current controversies, but one cannot help 
 "remarking that the history of the agitation of 1868-69 is 
 "in itself an expost of the strange hallucinations about 
 "Vaticanism, of which so much is heard now. The 
 "Catholics were arrayed in bitter hostility against the 
 " Protestants. This was done, not for a Catholic object. 
 " It was not done in accordance with any suggestion from 
 " the Vatican. On the contrary, it was done in opposition 
 " to the principles of the Catholic Church, and the declared 
 "wishes of the Vatican. Mr. Gladstone himself, with 
 " characteristic honesty and courage, did not conceal this 
 " then. In one of his speeches, previous to the General 
 " Election of that time, he quoted, from the authoritative 
 " Papal organ published in Rome, the disapproval of his 
 " projected Church disendowment in Ireland. Even some 
 " of his Liberal Catholic supporters openly boasted that, on 
 " this subject, they were acting in direct antagonism to the 
 "expressed sentiments of Rome." We must remember that 
 it was a Romanist who wrote these words. Doubtless the 
 Pope desired to receive the lands and funds of the Irish 
 Church ; and doubtless he desired to figure as an opponent 
 of Mr. Gladstone's measure ; but if he really opposed it, 
 he could have commanded the English and Irish bishops 
 to have opposed it, and in virtue of their oath, they must 
 have obeyed. Probably the power of Revolution, and the 
 permanent agitation created in Ireland by Mr. Gladstone's 
 measure, were more valued at Rome than the Irish Church 
 funds. Sir John Pope Hennessy continued : " But the 
 " leading Catholic prelates in England and Ireland resolved, 
 " nevertheless, on the grave step of zealously supporting Mr. 
 "Gladstone and the Liberals in secularizing Church property. 
 " After his public announcement that Rome disapproved 
 " of his Irish Church scheme, and after his denunciation of 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 59 
 
 "the Encyclical and Syllabus in 1868, these prelates still 
 " urged Catholic voters to support him as 'a great Liberal 
 " ' statesman.' " No doubt they did ; because he was doing 
 the work of Rome. In writing those pretended attacks on 
 Rome, Mr. Gladstone was also doing the work of Rome, 
 as we shall subsequently see from the testimony of Jesuits 
 themselves. 
 
 This time let me conclude with one extract from the 
 Pope's organ, the Journal de Rome, of Nov. 21, 1882. 
 The paragraph may have been inserted in order to dis- 
 credit the suspicion that Mr. DTsraeli had been a Ro- 
 manist or perhaps a crypto-Jesuit ever since the win- 
 ter of 1835 ; for such an assertion had been made in the 
 House of Commons. However that may be, the passage 
 is as follows : " Lord Beaconsfield on his death-bed begged 
 " one of his friends to go for Father Clare, S J. (the Rector 
 "of ii i, Mount Street), with whom the illustrious statesman 
 "had, for a long time, had friendly relations, during the 
 " time that this father was attached to the Jesuit Church in 
 " Farm Street. But as Father Clare was absent from town, 
 " in Liverpool, another Jesuit Father, Father Clarke, has- 
 " tened to the bed-side of the sick man, and had the 
 "happiness of receiving his abjuration and embracing him 
 " as a member of the Catholic Church." 
 
 NO. XI. 
 
 I HAVE already made allusion to Mr. Gladstone's 
 " Expostulation," and his " Vaticanism," two pamphlets 
 which had a very anti-Catholic appearance ; and I have 
 rehearsed what a Roman Catholic gentleman had said to 
 me with regard to them ; namely, that they had been 
 written "as a blind." In support of that view, I may 
 quote what a Father Provincial of the Jesuits in France 
 wrote, on Nov. 24, 1874: "What a service Mr. Gladstone 
 " has rendered us ! Not only he has given occasions [sic]
 
 60 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "to the manifestations of truth, but he has disconnected 
 " the English and Irish Catholics from any political party. 
 " How strong they will be when they have an existence of 
 " their own, and give their support in the measure as they 
 "can expect assistance for their faith." In the reply, these 
 words occur : " Those many in England who are bitter 
 " against the Church (of Rome) will be united under 
 "Gladstone, as their leader; and he, as such, will take 
 " care that they shall do nothing really baneful to Catholic 
 
 " policy." 
 
 With respect to a statement regarding Mr. D' Israeli, I 
 may quote from the letter of a Jesuit, dated Sept. 13, 
 !86i : "You have sat down to count the cost of the 
 "warfare to sum up the penalties for being honest. 
 . . . No one comes to me except by renouncing 
 "himself, that is, the world. A letter of Disraeli's, a 
 " quarter of a century ago, turned up the other day, which, 
 "by the context, was written in answer to one of mine, 
 " making the condition of receiving him a pledge to use 
 " honestly the knowledge he might acquire. . . . Now 
 "you will be in fellowship with all who have gone before us, 
 "who have become good, and beloved by all those, in our 
 " day, who may be esteemed such." Let us, however, pass 
 from this necessary explanation of two points in my last 
 letter. 
 
 The session of 1874 saw the introduction of two Bills 
 affecting the status of the English and Scotch Established 
 Churches. They were really Bills of Mr. D'Israeli's 
 Government. Ostensibly they were brought in by private 
 members. The one was supposed to have for its object 
 "the putting down of Ritualism," and was called "The 
 "Public Worship Regulation Act, 1874;" the other 
 measure was intended to democratize the Established 
 Church of Scotland, and was termed "The Act for the 
 " Abolition of Patronage." In support of the former Bill, 
 Mr. D'Israeli said alluding to a speech in which Mr. 
 Walter had quoted a number of Popish doctrines from
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 6r 
 
 books published by Ritualists : " Whether those doctrines, 
 " which were quoted from their authoritative writings, by 
 " the Hon. Member for Berkshire, are or are not adopted 
 " by them (the Ritualists) as dpctrines held by members of 
 " the Roman Catholic Church, / am prepared to treat those 
 " doctrines with reverence. What I object to is, that they 
 " should be held by ministers of a Church, who, when they 
 "enter that Church, make a solemn compact with the 
 " nation that they will utterly reject them." Every one 
 remembers the eloquent attack which Monsignor Capel 
 made on the Ritualists, in two sermons which he preached 
 about this time. The Monsignor's object was to drive 
 the Ritualists into the Church of Rome, or at all events 
 to prevent Ritualism from becoming a permanent resting- 
 place for those who had Romanizing tendencies. Mr. 
 D'Israeli continued: "What I do object to is the Mass 
 " in Masquerade. To the solemn ceremonies of our 
 " Roman Catholic friends, I am prepared to extend 
 "that reverence which my mind and conscience extend 
 " always to religious ceremonies sincerely believed in." 
 
 It will be borne in mind how Mr. Gladstone assisted 
 Mr. D'Israeli in passing the Bill. He occupied the ground, 
 on the motion for going into committee, with a notice of 
 six long and very wordy resolutions. Having shut out 
 every other amendment, he withdrew his Resolutions. If 
 the object of the Bill had really been to "put down 
 " Ritualism," neither of those eminent statesmen, perhaps, 
 would have had anything to do with it. The Jesuits, as 
 we shall presently see, looked on the Bill in a very 
 different light. In commenting on Mr. Gladstone's line 
 of action, the Tablet remarked : " The conduct of their 
 "leader has greatly disconcerted the Liberal party. He 
 "has put forward those resolutions which Mr. D'Israeli 
 " pronounced to be ' fatal to the continuance of that 
 " ' religious settlement which had prevailed in this country 
 " 'for more than two centuries, and on which much of our 
 "'civil liberty depends, to wit, the supremacy of t/te State
 
 62 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "' over the Church' Mr. Gladstone has done this, setting 
 
 " all his party by the ears Mr. Gladstone is con- 
 
 "tinually reminded of the way in which he has split up 
 " that party, and rendered it utterly powerless. It may be 
 " that posterity will consider this to have been one of Mr. 
 " Gladstones greatest achievements" Those were the words 
 of the Tablet, edited by Bishop Vaughan. We shall be 
 able to trace, on both sides of the House, in the action of 
 those leaders who were nominally opposed to each other, 
 the laborious and long continued attempt to break up the 
 two great parties, in the interest of the R.oman Catholic 
 Church. For the present let us rather fix our attention 
 on the Bill for putting down Ritualism, or "The Public 
 "Worship Regulation Bill, 1874." 
 
 The Jesuit reviewer, Father Forbes, S. J., thus wrote 
 of it in the Etudes Religieuses, of March, 1876 : " In en- 
 " deavouring to appreciate the scope and probable conse- 
 " quences of the Bill against Ritualism, we saw reasons for 
 " saying that the first effect of the application of this law 
 " would be to lay bare the frightful anarchy which exists 
 "in the Anglican Church, and to force even the most 
 'illogical to take up a more decided ground." By that 
 Act the Ecclesiastical Courts were abolished, and the 
 English clergy were made to depend, for their doctrines, 
 their liturgy, and their ritual, on a layman, nominated 
 ostensibly by Parliament, but really by Mr. D'Israeli. The 
 clergy have, under the Bill, no appeal to any Synod of the 
 Church, nor to any ecclesiastical authority. They cannot 
 apply to any but a civil court, to the Privy Council, 
 whose doctrines are irreformable ; to the Privy Council, 
 which is destitute of any doctrinal guarantees, and whose 
 composition and personnel is such as the Prime Minister 
 determines. Even the Bishops, whom Mr. D'Israeli de- 
 signated as " the mitred nullities of the Anglican Church," 
 even they have to submit to this lay authority ; and the 
 Anglican Hierarchy at once became a blind instrument 
 in the hands of lay functionaries. Moreover, the judicial
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 63 
 
 procedure of the Anglican Church was altered without 
 her consent ; ay, against the remonstrances of Convo- 
 cation. The Bishops were thus deprived of all jurisdiction. 
 Moreover, there was introduced into the Church a prin- 
 ciple in contradiction to the fundamental principle of every 
 Church. Therefore, humanly speaking, her decay and 
 destruction is merely a question of time ; for, as Aristotle 
 remarks : " all decay is the result of contradictories 
 " existing together in the composition of a thing." Such 
 was the view which was taken, by the acute Jesuit reviewer, 
 of the Bill for putting down Ritualism. It was a Bill for 
 causing decay in the Church of England. Thus was the 
 axe laid at the root of the " Upas-tree " in England, by 
 Mr. D'Israeli, as effectively as Mr. Gladstone, with his axe, 
 cut off the three branches of " the Upas-tree of Protestant 
 " ascendency," in Ireland. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone's argument, in his pretended opposition 
 to the Public Worship Regulation Bill, was as follows : 
 As the Anglican Church admits all kinds of contra- 
 dictions, therefore Ritualism should be allowed to remain 
 there beside Evangelicalism ; the High Church should be 
 fostered with the Low Church, and the Broad Church with 
 the No-Church ; the wolf should be permitted to lie down 
 with the lamb. Mr. D'Israeli, in reply, did not even pretend 
 to refute this position. On the contrary, he admitted that 
 the Anglican Church had always been divided into parties ; 
 and asserted, further, that it should comprehend every 
 party, and should receive contradictory doctrines and 
 principles into its body of dogma. The High Church, he 
 said, is representative of the taste for rites and ceremonies ; 
 the Low Church stands for religious enthusiasms ; and the 
 Broad Church satisfies the aspirations of Rationalism. 
 There is, therefore, he said, no place left for a Ritualistic 
 party ; and for this reason he introduced the Bill " to put 
 " down Ritualism." That was Mr. D'Israeli's argument. 
 
 There certainly was the following dilemma in the mind 
 of the House : The cause of the existence of parties in the
 
 64 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Anglican Church is that she took her stand on the Pro- 
 testant principle of the right of private judgment ; and 
 whatever is done to limit the existence of any party is pro 
 tanto a denial of the principle of the Church of England, and 
 a blow struck at its raison d'etre namely, the inherent right 
 of persons to differ in opinion as to doctrines and practices. 
 
 While the Act has been effective in introducing a contra- 
 diction at the very basis of the English Church, it has been 
 cleverly contrived so as to let the Ritualists escape. Mr. 
 Dale, the Rector of St. Vedast's, was, with difficulty, 
 convicted ; and another Ritualist escaped altogether. 
 Whatever was done, with the intention of attacking 
 Ritualism, was sure to be encumbered with some blunder 
 which was fatal to success. 
 
 Mr. Tooth was tried in Lambeth ; and at once it was 
 decided that, in accordance with the Act, he should have 
 been arraigned either in the City of London, or in West- 
 minster, or else in the diocese of Rochester. 
 
 The writs against Mr. Dale and Mr. Enraght should 
 have been opened in the Court of Queen's Bench ; but 
 they were opened in the Crown Office. 
 
 Lord Penzance's deprivation of the Vicar of Prestbury 
 was invalid, because sentence was pronounced in a Com- 
 mittee-room of the House of Lords, which was not legally 
 in the Province of Canterbury. In every case, some 
 minute blunder against the intricate provisions of the Act, 
 like a grit in the wheels of some fine complex machinery, 
 served to put the whole out of gear ; and the Act, while 
 successfully introducing a fell virus into the life blood of 
 the Anglican Church, has always most signally failed " to 
 "put down Ritualism." 
 
 As I have said, a private member, the Recorder of the 
 City of London, had been prevailed upon to take charge 
 of the Bill in the House of Commons. Yet, in July, Mr. 
 D'Israeli fully acknowledged that his Government were 
 " morally responsible " for it. They, in fact, had thrown 
 over their Judicature Bill, their Land Transfer Bill, and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 65 
 
 their Endowed Schools Bill, to make room for the Public 
 Worship Regulation Bill ; and, at the close of the Session, 
 *Mr. D'Israeli, at the Mansion House dinner, included the 
 Public Worship Regulation Bill amongst the measures for 
 which he took credit to himself. In the House of Lords, 
 the Lord Chancellor spoke of that Bill with approval, as a 
 result of the legislation of his Government. 
 
 In the same year (1874) the "Church Patronage, Scotland 
 " Bill," was introduced and passed. It placed the election of 
 the clergy in the hands of the congregations, and made all 
 the parishioners the judges of the doctrines preached by 
 their ministers. Here, too, there was introduced a principle 
 which is contradictory to the nature of a Church ; and, in 
 a different way, the same result has been brought about in 
 Scotland by this Bill, which was achieved in Ireland by Mr. 
 Gladstone. For, in both countries, the Protestant clergy 
 have been made the servants of the people ; and if the 
 people are revolutionary, the clergy must necessarily be the 
 chief revolutionists, or starve. 
 
 No. XII. 
 
 IT is not only by the institution of a court of law, to judge 
 of ecclesiastical affairs, that the destruction of the Church 
 of England is to be brought about. Traitors have been 
 introduced into the councils of the Church, in order to 
 vulgarize the very offences which that court of law should 
 put down. An adherent of the Jesuits, if he was not him- 
 self a Jesuit, a man who has received very lucrative and 
 high Colonial appointments, explained to me in the year 
 1867, that, "the High Church clergy are the net which 
 " they employed to bring the Church of England over to 
 " the Roman Catholic Church." The occasion of that 
 confidence (to use a French term) was this. He asked me 
 what I thought of the Ritualists. I replied, " They are
 
 66 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " volunteers ; they are neither the regular army nor the 
 " mob." On my saying so, he confided in me the fact 
 which I have narrated. It was then that I perceived why 
 Lord Beaconsfield and Mr. Gladstone always gave im- 
 portant livings and places of trust to the High Church 
 clergy and Ritualists. 
 
 It has always been, for forty years, a most remarkable 
 fact, that the Ritualists and High Church clergy, while 
 professing absolute submission to "the Church," have 
 always resisted, to the uttermost, the authority of their 
 ecclesiastical superiors in the Church of England. Did 
 not that patent fact suffice to prove, to any reflecting man, 
 that the Church of the Ritualists, to which they owed 
 obedience, was not the Church of England? Another 
 remarkable fact is, that the Ritualists and High Church 
 clergy do not, as a rule, receive livings in quiet country 
 parishes, where their influence would not have so wide an 
 extent. They are, somehow, always appointed to cures in 
 populous town districts, where the area is great on which 
 their influence may be exerted, although the endowments 
 may be pitifully small in respect to the work which they 
 perform. 
 
 Forty years ago nay, less than forty years Ritualists 
 were ignored or laughed at. But it is always the case that 
 the " eccentricity " of last year, has become the common 
 practice of this year. The " eccentricity " has become stale, 
 and we have ceased to laugh ; the falsehood has become 
 somewhat respectable, and no longer gives a shock to 
 those who were wont to blame it. Archbishop Sumner 
 truly said of the Puseyites, or High Churchmen of his day : 
 "They have gone on from one Romish practice and one 
 " Romish tenet to another, until all that is distinctive of 
 " Protestant doctrine and Protestant worship has well-nigh 
 " disappeared." If he could use such terms of the Puseyites 
 of that day, the first tentative conspirators, what would 
 he have said of the Ritualist traitors of this day ? The 
 Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol (Bishop Ellicott), in a
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 67 
 
 pastoral at the beginning of last year, 1885, said that, 
 " sinister practices are being pushed silently on ; and where 
 " discord next shows itself it will be found to have become 
 " more formidable ; " and further : " Practices are now 
 " being quietly introduced, compared with which, lights 
 " and vestments are innocence itself." He specified : 
 " Reservation of the Sacrament ; " " celebrations of the 
 " Eucharist that are repulsive even to advanced High 
 " Churchmen ; " "a studied avoidance of the use of the 
 " New Testament in the religious teaching in the parish 
 " schools ; " and " admissions to confirmation only on 
 " condition of regular and periodical confession." These 
 practices, the Bishop says, "are furtively increasing." Or 
 let us take the testimony of enemies. The Tablet of Feb. 
 28, 1885, said of Canon Liddon's book, " Some Elements 
 "of Religion," that it is a work "containing arguments 
 "which must, if logically followed, lead to the Catholic 
 " Church." In the same paper we find the experiences of 
 a Ritualist who became a Romanist, and who confessed 
 that at a certain stage, he went to his Ritualist confessor and 
 laid before him the condition of his mind. What was the 
 advice which he received in the " Protestant " confessional ? 
 That if he was honestly convinced of those opinions which 
 he had expressed, the only course open to hi/a was to join 
 the Church of Rome ! The so-called Protestant confessor 
 thereupon gave, to his penitent, a letter of introduction to 
 a Roman Catholic priest, who was to achieve the perver- 
 sion of that deluded self-accuser. 
 
 The appointment of Ritualists to populous parishes is 
 the rule ; but there are exceptions. They are occasionally 
 sent to Low Church parishes, where their appearance gives 
 a great shock to the parish, and causes a great excitement. 
 Such was Mr. Gladstone's appointment of Mr. Ommaney 
 to St. Matthew's, Sheffield, in October, 1882. It was a 
 very Low Church parish, and Mr. Ommaney was a Ritualist. 
 Mr. Ommaney quickly invited a mission preacher from 
 Bristol, a Mr. Ives, who advocated auricular confession,
 
 68 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 and asserted the power of a priest to forgive sins and 
 absolve penitents from guilt. Disturbances ensued. There 
 were even altercations in the church ; and the controversy 
 ran to such a height that " a body of police " had to be 
 present during the services, to keep order. Reflecting 
 persons have often asked themselves why Mr. Gladstone, if 
 he must appoint a Ritualist to a cure of souls, should not 
 send him to some parish where the congregation had 
 already been led into Ritualism ? A Ritualist might be in 
 keeping there. But why send a Ritualist to a Low Church 
 parish, where he only serves to inflame rancour and disturb 
 the peace? Is it to be supposed that Mr. Gladstone is 
 not aware that the clergymen he appoints are Ritualists ? 
 Can he be ignorant when a parish is a Low Church 
 parish? Or can it be that he selects the Low Church 
 parish precisely because it is Low Church? And is it 
 his object to spread Ritualism over the whole country, 
 and to discredit the Church of England by destroying 
 its peace ? 
 
 This baleful action is not confined to clergymen. It 
 extends to bishops also. Not only parishes, but sees 
 come under Mr. Gladstone's fostering care. The Pope's 
 organ, the Journal de Rome, of January 24, 1883, remarks : 
 " The three prelates, recently appointed by Mr. Gladstone, 
 " all belong to the High Church, and two of them, the 
 " Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Bishop of Truro, are 
 " political adversaries of his, and members of the Conserva- 
 " tive party ; which shows that the Prime Minister gives 
 " more weight to his policy regarding the Church, than to 
 " his personal predilections." The same journal, the next 
 day, published a translation of the pastoral of Dr. Fraser, 
 the Bishop of Manchester, from which the following is an 
 extract. The capitals are found in the Pope's organ. Dr. 
 Fraser says : " There exists among us an extreme party, 
 "the Ritualists, which entertain opinions on the Com- 
 " munion the Invocation of the Holy Virgin and Saints, 
 "and Absolution, WHICH IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 69 
 
 "DISTINGUISH FROM THE DOCTRINES PRO- 
 " FESSED BY THE CHURCH OF ROME. I cannot 
 " (says Bishop Fraser) give my approval to such doctrines ; 
 " and when I turn to the principles of the Prayer-book, / 
 " foresee, for the Church of England, a period of troubles in 
 "the near present; while, for the future, which is very 
 " menacing and very near, I foresee a series of disasters, 
 "and ultimate destruction" 
 
 The Pope's organ regarded the Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury as a High Churchman. He was made Bishop by 
 Lord Beaconsfield in 1877, being forty-eight years old; and 
 Archbishop by Mr. Gladstone in 1882. Sic itur ad astra. 
 It is true that Dr. Benson's appointments have indicated a 
 decided preference for Ritualism. Mr. Thornhill Webber, 
 the new Bishop of Brisbane, for example, was, to say the 
 least, an associate with Ritualists. Mr. Cox, curate of 
 Enville, near Stourbridge, who has urged every one to 
 practise auricular confession, and caused his own children 
 to set the example, was made, by his Grace, a Doctor of 
 Divinity. Let those instances, out of many, suffice. The 
 Journal de Rome (June 23, 1884) again triumphed in the 
 fact that the new Bishop of Ripon " keeps the festivals of 
 " the Saints," and uses the " Hymns Ancient and Modern," 
 " and, in other words, completely follows the practices of 
 " the Church of Rome." The new Bishop of Chester, who 
 was appointed by Mr. Gladstone in the same year (Times, 
 September 23, 1884), went against the ancient customs of 
 his cathedral, in introducing the eastward position, and 
 other Romanist practices. The new Bishop of Lincoln, 
 whom Mr. Gladstone appointed last year, 1885, has 
 affirmed the doctrine of transubstantiation ; has advocated 
 a visible communion between the Church of England and 
 the Church of Rome ; and, in the " Communicant's Man- 
 " ual," has recommended a number of Romish works, as 
 suitable for meditation and devotion. He also insists on 
 Confession and Absolution " as a substantial part of ele- 
 "mentary instruction"; and teaches the practice of praying
 
 70 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 for the dead. He, as Canon King, was principal of Cud- 
 desdon College; and Mr. Gladstone entrusted the education 
 of his son to Canon King's care that son who is a "Priest- 
 " Associate of the Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament," 
 and a member of the English Church Union. One extract 
 from the "Communicant's Manual," published by the Bishop 
 of Lincoln, will suffice : " The Consecration is ... the 
 " central act of the service, by which tJie Bread and Wine 
 " are made . . . verify and indeed, the Body and Blood 
 " of Christ, and are offered to God the Father as the Euchar- 
 " istic Sacrifice" and therefore he teaches his people to say, 
 to the bread after consecration, " My Lord and my God," 
 and, " Devoutly I adore thee, Deity unseen," etc. The 
 " eastward position " is now adopted in the Cathedrals of 
 St. Paul's, London ; Chester, Lincoln, Lichfield, Liver- 
 pool, Manchester, Norwich, Oxford, St. Albans, Truro, 
 Worcester, and York. 
 
 How can any one who reads such things, and considers 
 them, easily refrain from concluding that such appoint- 
 ments, by Mr. Gladstone, are parts of a deep-laid plan to 
 fill the Church with partisans of the Roman Church, in 
 order to accustom the laity to accept the doctrines, and 
 follow the practices, and adopt the symbols of the Roman 
 Church ; so that, at last, the Church of England may be 
 absorbed by the Church of Rome ? Nor is this plan 
 confined to the bishops and clergy alone. Last year. 
 Mr. Gladstone expressed himself warmly in favour of a 
 society, for working men, of an advanced Romanizing 
 character " The Church of England Working Men's 
 " Society " ; and by his countenance and encomiums, he 
 lias done all he could to extend the influence of that 
 society among the working classes. As he does his best 
 to shield the Ritualistic clergy from adverse tribunals, by 
 the appointment of sympathising bishops; so he seems 
 anxious to support the Ritualistic clergy in their practices, 
 by Romanizing their congregations. I have often heard, 
 from the Jesuits, that their hope of Romanizing England
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 71 
 
 lies in the upper classes and working men ; not in the 
 middle classes. 1 
 
 I will conclude this letter by quoting unimpeachable 
 testimony to the fact that this Romanizing conspiracy 
 has been carried on already for forty years. Lord John 
 Russell, in 1850, wrote his famous protest, called "the 
 " Durham Letter," at which Mr. D'Israeli sneered in his 
 latest novel. Lord John Russell said : " There is a danger 
 " which alarms me much more than any aggression of a 
 " foreign sovereign. Clergymen of our own Church, who 
 " have subscribed the Thirty-nine Articles, and acknow- 
 " ledged in explicit terms the Queen's Supremacy, have 
 " been tJte most forward in leading their flocks step by step 
 ' to the verge of the precipice. . . . / have little hope 
 " that the propounders and framers of these innovations will 
 " desist from tlieir insidious course" No, they have not 
 desisted ; for, in the words of the Jesuit, " they are the 
 " net which the Church of Rome employs to bring the 
 " Church of England over to herself." 
 
 No. XIII. 
 
 IN December, 1882, I received a letter from a very learned 
 Canon of the English Church, in which he said : " I am 
 " surprised at nothing the Jesuits have ever done or planned. 
 " They are like a cancer on the Church of Rome, or rather, 
 "like the wen, in Milton's parable, which quarrelled for 
 " supremacy, with the head. ... I dread their in- 
 " fluence in this diocese ; for the supineness of our clergy 
 " and people is simply deplorable. They were very 
 " dangerous when they were in the front of their genera- 
 " tion ; but then we were better able to detect their plans 
 " of evil. They are more so now that their ignorance 
 
 'We learn {Morning Post, May 23, 1885) that Mr. Charles Powell, 
 the Secretary of the " Church of England Working Men's Society," has 
 left for America, carrying with him Letters Commendatory from the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury to the Bishops, Clergy, and Laity of the 
 American Church.
 
 72 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " compels them to follow up in the rear of civilization ; 
 " for we can less see what they are doing, or discern their 
 " plots. ... I imagine that the way they insinuate them- 
 " selves into families, and become masters of the history of 
 "family life, must render them as dangerous to society as 
 " they were, even when they led the education of the great. 
 " This kind of work can be done by very inferior minds ; 
 " and this very inferiority makes it more dangerous and 
 "odious in its character. Lord Russell told me that he 
 " believed that there were Jesuits in the Church of England, 
 " and (but for the stupidity of our Ritualists, which makes 
 " them more imprudent even than the modern Jesuits) I 
 
 " could well believe it. Will you believe that, at 
 
 "Parish Church, on Sunday last, the curate asked the 
 " congregation for their prayers for the repose of the soul 
 " of the Archbishop ? " 
 
 In a subsequent letter, the Canon said : " Lord John 
 "Russell distinctly expressed his belief that there were 
 " Jesuits among the clergy of the Church of England ; 
 " which I almost think must be, in some form or other, 
 " true. I cannot say how, unless, like John Inglesant, they 
 " are permitted by their Spiritual Director, to remain in 
 " the Church, doing the work of Roman Apostles. When 
 
 " I asked Mr. , what was the meaning of the closet 
 
 " behind his altar, his reply was : ' That is with a view to 
 " ' better times.' He said the same to the Bishop of - , 
 "when he made a like inquiry." The clergyman men- 
 tioned by the Canon said to me one evening : " My great 
 "ambition is to die a Jesuit brother." He did not say "a 
 " Jesuit priest," nor " a Jesuit father," be it remarked ; for 
 he was a married man, and referred, doubtless, to the 
 " Third Order " of Lay Jesuits. There are many who 
 approach very near that clergyman. The members of the 
 " Society of the Holy Cross," for example ; and they are 
 very numerous. According to their statutes, they " say 
 " mass for their departed brethren " ; they " say mass for 
 " the Intention of the Society," and they " say mass daily " ;
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 they " frequent the Sacrament of Penance," and they are 
 "sworn celibates." Numbers of books are annually pub- 
 lished to do the same work as those Ritualists are com- 
 missioned to perform. The " Irish Church Almanack " for 
 last year, speaks of the Reformation as having been com- 
 pleted when Henry VIII., "that unscrupulous monarch, 
 " threw off his allegiance to the Pope." 
 
 It does not seem that the Jesuits in the Church, and the 
 Ritualistic appointments by Prime Ministers, have met 
 with all the success that was looked for. For bribes, and 
 even terrorism, threats, and menaces have been resorted to 
 for the spread of Romanist practices. The Times, of April 
 10, 1882, furnishes us with an example of that method. 
 The Vicar of Holy Trinity Church, Liverpool, alleged that 
 " threats and promises had been freely used to induce him 
 " to surrender the simple and faithful worship of the Re- 
 formed Church of England." He said: "The utmost 
 "pressure was brought to bear upon me to adopt the 
 "'Ancient and Modern Hymns,' which, in my opinion, 
 "teach, among other questionable doctrines, Transub- 
 " stantiation and the worship of the Virgin Mary. . . . 
 " From December to the middle of March, strong and un- 
 " tiring efforts have been made to get me to introduce the 
 " foregoing Hymn-book, and to make the Church service less 
 " and less congregational. ... I was also strongly urged 
 " to have the Communion table (called in this case ' altar ') 
 " covered with black on Good Friday ; and to have, on 
 " Easter Sunday, on the same table, a cross with flowers," 
 and so forth. 
 
 With all such practices rampant throughout the king- 
 dom ; with rewards and menaces, from high quarters ; 
 with the favour shown to Ritualists, and the aversion 
 evinced towards simple Christians, by those in authority ; 
 with the continual appointments of Ritualists to Bishoprics 
 and rich Canonries ; how can we wonder at the triumphant 
 tone of the Pope's newspaper, the Journal de Rome, on 
 February 17, 1884, when it exclaimed in joy: "The
 
 74 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Ritualistic movement in England towards the establish- 
 " ment of Catholic institutions continues without ceasing. 
 ". . The setting up of images in the cathedrals which 
 " have been profaned by Protestantism, is most consoling. 
 " Nor is it only in the setting up of the images of the Saints 
 " that the tendency of Ritualism towards the Catholic 
 " Church, is manifested. The practice of Auricular Con- 
 " fession among Protestant Ritualists is now nearly 
 "universal. . . . Even the formula of confession is 
 "couched in Catholic language. Here it is: ' 1 'confess to 
 "' Almighty God, TO THE HOLY VIRGIN MARY, AND TO 
 "'ALL THE SAINTS, 1 and to you, my Father, that I have 
 " ' sinned.' After an explanation of the mode in which all 
 " the particular sins have to be enumerated, the formula 
 " continues : ' / humbly crave pardon of God, and of you, my 
 " ' Father, and I ask for a penance, for counsel, and for 
 "'absolution, and I PRAY THE HOLY VIRGIN AND ALL 
 " ' THE SAINTS, and you, my Father, to pray for me to God, 
 "'our Master; Amen' Is not that advance a matter of 
 " the highest import ? It is the first time that the Ritualists 
 "have prayed directly to the Holy Virgin and to the 
 " Saints." So says the Papal organ, in its triumph ! 
 
 The same Papal journal, on April 27, 1884, not only 
 shows to what an extent Jesuits and Jesuited persons have 
 been surreptitiously placed in the Church of England ; but 
 also proves the activity with which those persons have 
 been pushed forwards, and advanced in honour and power, 
 by the treacherous Government in England : " Ritualism, 
 " that is to say, the imitation of the forms and usages of 
 "the Church of Rome, is introduced more and more into 
 " the Church of England. The days of Holy Week have 
 " given renewed proofs of this fact. . . . They organ- 
 " ized the following devotions : The Three Hours ; the 
 " Stations of the Cross, with the usual pictures ; and the 
 "Tenebrai. Moreover, it is no longer simple clergymen 
 " who give themselves up to Ritualism, but also the highest 
 1 The italics and capitals are not mine.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 75 
 
 "dignitaries of the Church. At Saint Paul's, Canon Scott- 
 " Holland preached the Three Hours, assisted by the Arch- 
 bishop of Canterbury. At Upper Clapton, it was the 
 " Bishop of Bedford ; and again at Saint Paul's, it was the 
 " Bishop of Rochester who conducted the Spiritual Exer- 
 "cises. The movement has also been extended to the 
 " Provinces. At Lichfield, Bishop Maclagan ; at Worcester, 
 " Canon Knox-Little led those devotions in the Cathedrals 
 " of those cities ; while the strains of Catholic music were 
 "heard. ... In the church of St. Alban, they lit a 
 " Paschal Candle on All Saints' day ; they burned an im- 
 "mense number of candles, and they decorated with 
 " particular care the altars to the right and left of the 
 " High Altar ; l and the Reverend Vicar, Dr. F. G. Lee, 
 "after his sermon, made a procession round his church. 
 " . . . At Prestbury, a clergyman was deposed by his 
 " bishop, because of his Ritualist opinions ; and at once 
 "set himself in open rebellion against the decision of the 
 "Bishop, and declared to his congregation, with their 
 " approval, that he would not diminish one jot from his 
 " Ritualistic practices. ... It does not require to be 
 " said that we -witness with delight how Ritualism is bring- 
 " ing back the prodigal Church of England to her Mother 
 " Church ; and we await, from that movement, the greatest 
 "benefit to the cause of Truth." So wrote the Pope's 
 journal on April 27. Two days after, it made the an- 
 nouncement, with what truth I cannot say, that " the 
 "Monarch)' of England, represented by the Prince of 
 " Wales, assisted on Good Friday, at the Three Hours, in 
 "one of the most important churches of London." 
 
 These facts are sufficient of themselves to open the eyes 
 of any thoughtful man as to what is being plotted and 
 manoeuvred in the Church of England by the wire-pullers 
 of the Romanist Church. I have mentioned enough, 
 surely, to confirm, in our minds, the statement of the 
 Jesuits, that they have Ritualists in the Church of Eng- 
 1 The altars of the Virgin Mary and of Joseph,
 
 7 6 RECENT EVENTS, AND A ' 
 
 land, as " the net with which they hope to bring the Church 
 " of England over to Rome." When we remember that 
 the leaders of political parties were only in simulated 
 opposition, while they were really co-operating and working 
 together to advance the Papal cause in England ; wh< 
 we see the Ritualists in the Church, as well as those wh 
 have Romanizing tendencies in Parliament, advanced and 
 pushed up to the top of affairs, so that England may t 
 ever kept between "the upper and nether millstone' 
 Popery ; when we remember, moreover, that there are 
 many, who, in their hearts, abhor this Papist conspiracy, 
 but yet have to labour for it and hold their tongues, 
 because, by the adroitness of Jesuit friends, or by a c 
 honest recklessness, or, perhaps, by the strength of youth 
 passions, they have become "committed" to the Jesuits- 
 by the commission of some crime to remain their slaves 
 for ever after ; when we think of that, and reflect that 
 even one man has been kept by a Divine power from falling 
 into the trap, yet he will never be believed when he opens 
 his mouth to reveal the conspiracy, because of the 
 sands of interested persons, and many thousands of their 
 slaves who are ready and waiting to scoff him down 
 when we think of all that, do we not feel overwhelmed 
 the threats of impending disaster ? do we not lose i 
 all confidence, all energy in endeavouring to avert the evil 
 
 No ! There is one thought which can support us and 
 give us courage for the coming conflict the thought that 
 the Lord Jesus is King ; that He is the Ruler and Judge 
 of the whole earth ; and that nothing is done upon the 
 earth but He doeth it altogether ; and further that ' 
 " is no evil in the city, but lo ! the Lord hath done it." 
 When nerved by that thought for the struggle which is 
 near we must yet bear in mind what a potent and un- 
 scrupulous factor the Roman Church is ! It is the largest 
 secret society in the world, beside which Freemasonry i 
 but a pigmy. Think of even a part of it the Jesuit 
 Society with its Nihilist adherents in Russia, its Socialist
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 77 
 
 allies in Germany, its Fenians and Nationalists in Ireland, 
 its accomplices and its slaves in its power ; think of that 
 Society which has not scrupled to stir up the most bloody 
 wars between nations, in order to advance its purposes ; 
 and yet can stoop to hunting down a single man because 
 he knows their secret and will not be their slave hunting 
 him down, discrediting him, and thwarting him at every 
 turn, with the cool calculation that they will either drive 
 him mad or make him put an end to himself, so that the 
 secret may be buried with him. Think of a Society which 
 can devise such a diabolical scheme, and then boast of it ; 
 and say whether a desperate energy is not required in us, 
 like that of a man who wakes in the night and finds the 
 house in flames around him ? It is hard, I know, for poor 
 honest, simple-minded Protestants, without guile them- 
 selves, to realize, or even to credit the existence of such an 
 intricacy of iniquity, and such a thick defence of lies ; but 
 yet experto crede. 
 
 If you had been behind the scenes, without committing 
 yourself, it would even then have taken you years to realize 
 the extent of the iniquity, and to consider the course you 
 should pursue ; and then you would still have found before 
 you the labour of unravelling all that is being done by our 
 Government, and of tearing off the tissue of lies by which 
 their acts are concealed. Repeated attempts will have 
 taught you that there is not a public man on whom you 
 can lean. Because, as England is " between the upper and 
 " nether millstone," none but adherents or slaves are now 
 advanced ; and it stands to reason that the Jesuits, who 
 have got that far, have prepared new millstones, for the 
 time when the present ones shall have passed away ; and 
 then, again, younger millstones to come on after, and 
 wield the power of the nation.
 
 7 8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 NO. XIV. 
 
 WE may pass by, without remark, Lord Sandon's Educa- 
 tion Bill of 1876, on which Cardinal Manning bestowed 
 the qualified praise that it was " not hostile to Religious 
 "Education and to Catholics." Neither is it necessary 
 to dwell on Sir Richard Cross's Prison Bill of 1877, which 
 took the patronage away from the local magistrates, and 
 secured the appointment of Roman Catholic Chaplains to 
 gaols. We may well leave them on one side, and come to 
 the subject of Irish Education, the second branch of "the 
 " Upas-tree of Protestant ascendency." 
 
 On the "Ministerial explanation" of March 20, 18; 
 while Mr. Gladstone was Prime Minister, Mr. D'Israeli 
 spoke of the " Irish members, who might fairly be de- 
 " scribed as representing the Roman Catholic interest," 
 and continued : " I stated that they would act, and mos 
 " honourably act, with a view to effect the object which 
 " they wished to accomplish, namely, the establishment 
 "of a Roman Catholic University; and that, in my 
 opinion, that question had been definitively decided by 
 ' the nation at the last general election ; but that, totally 
 " irrespective of that national decision, events had occurred 
 " in Parliament since, which rendered it quite impossible 
 " for me to listen to any suggestions of the kind ; because, 
 "since the last general election, the endowments of the 
 " Protestant Church of Ireland had been taken away from 
 i t| a policy which I entirely disapproved, which I 
 "resisted, and which they had supported, and which 
 " having been carried into effect, offered, in my mind, a 
 "permanent and insurmountable barrier to the policy 
 "which they wished to see pursued." That was in 18; 
 Mr D'Israeli came into power in March, 1874; and at the 
 end of June, 1879, what happened ? The O'Connor Don 
 was endeavouring to carry through the House an 1 
 University Bill. The measure was producing, and had 
 almost produced a most serious split in the Liberal party
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 79 
 
 The official Liberals had determined to support the 
 O'Connor Don. This was to be expected ; for, with Mr. 
 Gladstone on one side, and Mr. D'Israeli on the other, 
 hardly any except those who agreed to support the Roman 
 Catholic cause, got appointed to any office, or were allowed 
 to advance, or gain credit in the House. The Scotch 
 members and the Radicals, on the other hand, were about 
 to oppose the O'Connor Don with all their energy. If, 
 then, Mr. D'Israeli meant what he said in 1873, if he really 
 and truly had taken his stand on the Protestant feeling of 
 the country, as he had so often announced, there was pre- 
 sented to him a certainty of increasing and consolidating 
 his power. To oppose the O'Connor Don, would draw 
 to Mr. D'Israeli's side all the Protestant Nonconformists, 
 Radicals, Tories, and Conservatives throughout the country. 
 That would veritably have been a winning card ! Did 
 Lord Beaconsfield take advantage of it ? What step 
 did he take ? He took the wind out of the O'Connor 
 Don's sails, by suddenly announcing that the Govern- 
 ment themselves would at once introduce an Irish 
 University Bill ! Lord Cairns introduced it into the House 
 of Lords. 
 
 On the 1 5th of July, while the Bill was in Committee 
 in the Lords, Lord Emly (i.e. William Monsell) said that : 
 " What the Government ought to do in the present case, 
 " was to apply to University Education the principle which 
 " they themselves had laid down last year for Intermediate 
 " Education in Ireland. A proposal had been made by the 
 "Irish Government, and had been agreed to by those who 
 " represented tlie Roman Catholic party" Lord Beaconsfield 
 at once jumped up and angrily denied the statement; 
 saying that, as for himself, he was entirely ignorant of 
 any proposal referred to by Lord Emly, as having been 
 made by the Government ; it was " a Romance," he said. 
 Lord Emly replied that he himself had seen the written 
 proposal, in Dublin, early in the spring. The Lord Lieu- 
 tenant of Ireland, the Duke of Marlborough, was present;
 
 go RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 and said to me afterwards, that it was " awful " to hear the 
 fibs (he used a stronger word) which Lord Beaconsfield 
 told ; for the negotiations, which were protracted, had been 
 conducted by Lord Beaconsfield himself. 
 
 Lord Beaconsfield was anxious to go further in the 
 matter of Roman Catholic Education ; but found that the 
 opinion of the Houses and the country was for preserving 
 at least a remnant of this branch of " the Upas-tree of 
 " Protestant ascendency." Therefore, on July 21, the now 
 stale trick of getting up an " Obstruction " by the Irish 
 members, was resorted to. Of course the Times contained, 
 the next morning, an inspired leader : " A timely con- 
 " cession may still secure the success of the measure. The 
 " principle of such a concession is ready to hand in the pro- 
 " visions of the Intermediate Education Act of last year. 
 If, as we trust might be the case, the Catholic 
 " party were ready to accept a compromise on such terms 
 " as would give colleges, schools, and places of private 
 " tuition, an indirect endowment by the payment of result 
 "fees, there is good reason to think that it would also 
 "prove acceptable to Parliament" The Government of 
 Mr. D'Israeli were anxious to endow the Roman Catholic 
 colleges and institutions, all the while that they pretended 
 to support Protestant principles and to be altogether averse 
 to all Catholic endowments whatever. They ran with the 
 hare, and hunted with the hounds. No one could have 
 spoken against "Endowment by result fees," more deci- 
 sively than Lord Cairns ; and yet the Conservative press 
 was, all the while, assiduous in advocating that form of 
 endowment which was called the " grant of result fees." 
 
 It was indeed widely held at the time, that the Govern- 
 ment were Janus-faced. That feeling was exacerbated by 
 the end of July (1879), when, at the very end of the session, 
 there suddenly appeared a Government Bill for applying 
 a sum of 1,300,000, out of the Irish Church Surplus Fund, 
 to the creation of a Pension Fund for the Irish school 
 teachers. Those teachers were nearly all Roman Catholics;
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 81 
 
 at all events, 98 per cent of the money went to the Roman 
 Catholics. The intentions of the Government, in this 
 respect, were kept a profound secret, until the Bill had 
 actually passed its second reading, at two o'clock on the 
 morning of July 24. The country then heard of it for the 
 first time. It was the end of the session. There was no 
 time to get up an agitation. Most members of Parliament 
 had, moreover, already run away from their posts, and were 
 out of reach of the call of their constituents. The Govern- 
 ment felt safe in practising their double-faced game. On 
 the evening of July 24, therefore, in the debate on the 
 Irish University Bill, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir 
 Stafford Northcote, said : " We are asked, Why are you 
 "going to endow, as the expression is, although we do 
 " not use it, Why are you going to endow by annual 
 " votes, and not out of the Church surplus ? Of course 
 " there is a great temptation to endow out of a fund like 
 " the Church surplus, and to put the matter quietly out 
 " of the control of Parliament. But that is' exactly what 
 "we think ought not to be done. We have, no doubt, 
 " done it in the case of Intermediate Education ; and I 
 " think, on the whole, we were justified in making the ex- 
 " periment. But the House will feel, considering the thorny 
 " nature of the subject, that there is much more delicacy 
 "in dealing with a great University question, than with 
 " a system of Intermediate Education." Those were the 
 professed intentions of the Government, to endow cer- 
 tainly ; but by annual votes of Parliament ; to introduce 
 only the thin edge of the wedge, and that with apparent 
 reluctance. 
 
 Of course Mr. Gladstone was there to play his part ; and 
 he rendered assistance in forwarding the Roman Catholic 
 cause. He wielded his sledge hammer, and at once drove 
 home the wedge, which Sir Stafford held in the cleft for 
 him. Here are Mr. Gladstone's words : " There are other 
 " important points, the whole scheme of the proposed 
 " subvention, the giving it by annual vote, and the announce- 
 
 G
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " ment that no recourse is to be had to the Church Surplus 
 " Fund, which appear to me to call for considerable dis- 
 "cussion. / entertain great doubts whether it is wise to 
 "expose the scheme to annual discussion in Parliament, 
 " seeing what prejudices and passions and interests may 
 "gather round it. . . . It appears to me that the public 
 " subvention ought to go beyond that which was described by 
 " the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as contained in the clause 
 "which he has mentioned. ... I should be very 
 " sorry to take the responsibility on myself, having failed 
 " in the attempt to settle this great question, of interposing 
 " any obstacle in the way of its settlement ; but the rule 
 "I desire to adopt for my guidance is that, this being pre- 
 " eminently an Irish question, I do not wish to separate my- 
 " self, on such a matter, from those who represent the general 
 " and well-considered feelings of the Irish people. I will not 
 "lightly, and without much consideration, separate my path 
 "from theirs. This is their question more than ours ; and 
 " they are making efforts, which are evidently conciliatory, 
 "to adjust it. It is my duty to co-operate with them as 
 " far as I can secure the attainment of that object. That 
 " co-operation I cheerfully offer. But there is one thing I 
 " could not do : Having been myself a party to proposals of a 
 " larger kind than this Bill contains, I could not urge, on 
 " the representatives of Ireland, tfie acceptance of a measure 
 " which I believe to be inadequate. That is the principle by 
 " which I shall endeavour to be guided in the future pro- 
 " ceedings on this matter. It would afford me, as I have 
 " no doubt it would to all members of the House, the most 
 " sincere satisfaction, if, out of the imperfect proposal now 
 " on the table, a measure could be shaped which would 
 " tend to give Ireland the fulfilment of her just expecta- 
 " tiofis on a question to her of such vital interest." 
 
 There were others, also, with their lesser hammers, to 
 strike their little blows on the top of the wedge. Mr. 
 Goschen expressly pledged himself "to the principle of 
 " result fees " ; while Mr. Gladstone, seeing the favourable
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 83 
 
 turn that things were taking, was careful not to limit him- 
 self, or cumber his advance towards greater concessions for 
 Roman Catholic Education. He condemned the proposals 
 of the Government as " inadequate " ; and left the way 
 open, to an indefinite length, for his future advance. 
 
 The way having been cleared, the Chief Secretary for 
 Ireland, next day, introduced a new clause, to secure the 
 payment of result fees. Then " prominent Irish politicians, 
 " Members of Parliament, and others, had an interview 
 " with the representatives of the Roman Catholic Hier- 
 " archy"; and "communications, from high clerical authori- 
 " ties in Ireland, were received, urging that the Bill should 
 " be pressed on, and passed." 
 
 It was plainly seen that Mr. Lowther's clause would 
 admit those Roman Catholic claims which the Government 
 had declared that they would never allow. It was per- 
 ceived that the clause would empower the Senate of the 
 new University so to distribute the money,. that nearly the 
 whole of it would go, not to the reward of the successful 
 student, but to the support of the denominational colleges, 
 which were in the hands of the Jesuits and other monks. 
 The student was to be merely the conduit-pipe, and 
 convey the money from the Government Treasury, to the 
 coffers of the Roman Catholic Colleges. Therefore it was 
 that the decreed and well-organized obstruction of the Irish 
 members was now suddenly transformed into a hearty and 
 somewhat noisy support. The House of Commons, as 
 usual, had been adroitly manipulated, and the Government, 
 with Mr. Gladstone's assistance, proceeded rapidly with its 
 work. Parliament had deliberated, and made wry faces 
 at the draught prepared by the State Apothecaries ; then 
 it opened its mouth, and gulped down great propositions 
 by the score, without stopping to taste them : the Pension 
 for Irish Roman Catholic Teachers ; the " grant of result 
 " fees " were swallowed ; the University of " Godless Col- 
 leges" and Trinity College thrust down into the condition 
 of local schools ; the student declared free to reside any-
 
 84 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 where -at Jesuit seminaries or elsewhere, drawing his 
 fees and mulcting the "Godless" College Professors c 
 their wages ; all this was swallowed ! 
 
 On August 7, Mr. Forster protested : " The object of the 
 Government evidently was to give aid to these Denomi- 
 national Colleges, and yet to be able to tell their con 
 "stituents that they had done nothing of the kind. 
 what avails a protest ? No Minister attempted to rq 
 this charge of fraud. The clauses were carried, alt! 
 Sir Walter Barttelot exclaimed, before the division : 
 understanding on which this Bill was introduced was i 
 there were to be no result fees, and it is intended 1 
 "the Government to that understanding, and not to go 
 
 " beyond it." 
 
 Does statesmanship consist in false denials, and < 
 faced poses ? Is the Leader of the House to excel 
 adroit shuffling of a political card-sharper, and the leg 
 demain of a hypocritical conjurer? Both Leaders 
 spired to advance the cause of the Roman Catholic Churc 
 Why ? Did they regard it as the Church of Christ ? 
 it would advance best without the devil's help. It i 
 grievous want of faith which induces a man to think 
 God needs Satan's help to rule the world. Even Uzzah 
 suffered for putting forth his hand to support the Art 
 If on the other hand, the Roman Catholic Church shoulc 
 not be the Church of God, but the woman on the scarle 
 beast who rules all the kings of the earth, then how i 
 we designate the co-operation of Mr. D'Israeli and Mr. 
 Gladstone ? 
 
 NO. XV. 
 
 DURING the debate on the second reading of the Irish 
 Education Bill in 1873, Archbishop Manning was in co: 
 stant attendance in the House of Commons, and 
 continually receiving notes, in pencil, from Mr. Glads'
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 85 
 
 One of these was shown to me by his Grace. It was 
 written in very friendly terms, and spoke of the embroglio 
 which the debate had got into, and expressed a hope that, 
 " out of the anarchy of opinions," a definite course would 
 shape itself. The Archbishop then told me that he had 
 advised Mr. Gladstone to give appointments to Mr. (now 
 Sir Henry) James, to Mr. (now Sir William) Harcourt, and 
 to Dr. (now Sir Lyon) Playfair, " in order to do away with 
 " the suspicion of Gladstone's Catholic tendencies " ; be- 
 cause, as he said, he expected that a storm would rise 
 against the Roman Catholic Church and against Mr. 
 Gladstone ; and that Mr. Gladstone would be wanted, in 
 Opposition, to take up a high Protestant position, and lead the 
 Nonconformists, so as to be able to govern the storm. That 
 was, doubtless, the reason that Mr. Gladstone, shortly 
 afterwards, wrote his pamphlets on "Vaticanism." On 
 May 14, 1875, Cardinal Manning again gave me this in- 
 formation. 
 
 That policy of the Cardinal has not been very successful 
 for the Roman Catholic Church. Both Sir Henry James 
 and Sir William Harcourt have risen to the top of affairs, 
 without losing their Protestant sympathies, and may prove 
 to be too redoubtable opponents to be put down. It is, 
 perhaps, with some justice that the Jesuits mistrust the 
 Cardinal ; although they have got to obey him, because the 
 Pope, on May 8, 1881, issued a Bull which placed the Jesuits 
 under the orders of the Bishops. The occasion on which I 
 learned their distrust of the Cardinal was the following : 
 On June 26, 1877, a Jesuit wrote to me: "A confidential 
 " agent came to me this morning from Constantinople, and 
 " what he told me leads me to expect the very reverse of 
 " peace. I believe the Russians will have a severe centre 
 " coups shortly." The next day I went to see him, and he 
 explained the centre coup as being " a plot for the rising of 
 " the Poles against Russia and Prussia ; France and Austria 
 " are to join the Poles, and be saved ; and the Temporal 
 " Power will be restored to the Pope." He then added
 
 86 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 that " he placed implicit faith in Lord Beaconsfield." Again, 
 on July 7, he reverted to the contre coups, which was pre- 
 paring, and said, " The Russians have been unsuccessful in 
 " Asia, in consequence of the Circassian rising ; and they 
 " will be defeated in Europe, by reason of the Polish rising 
 "that is preparing. The beating they received at Biela, 
 " has caused them to draw troops from Poland, leaving 
 " only 20,000 men there. Prussia will not be able to help 
 " Russia, because there are 120,000 Poles in the Prussian 
 " Army ; and besides, they will fear France. This is to 
 " be a Catholic rising ; and yet all the Radicals and Revo- 
 " lutionists will be forced to help Poland to obtain freedom. 
 " This will also force the hand of Austria. Moreover, the 
 " Hungarians will side with the Poles. Thus there will be 
 " a Catholic kingdom of Poland, and Austria and France 
 " will be forced into a Catholic policy. D'lsraeli knows all 
 " this." Subsequently he said, " Cardinal Manning is 
 "certain to know all about it if Gladstone is in it. But 
 "the Jesuits do not like the Cardinal; and the Cardinal 
 " does not understand the policy of the Vatican, although he 
 " thinks he does'.' 
 
 Let us revert to the year 1873, when I was told that Mr. 
 Gladstone would be wanted to take, in Opposition, a high 
 Protestant line. On the 24th of January, 1874, a Dissolu- 
 tion was announced. It was so sudden that every one 
 asked his neighbour what it all meant ? On Feb. 24, 
 Archbishop Manning explained the suddenness of the step. 
 Mr. Gladstone, he said, had done it in the hope of getting 
 the Nonconformists out of the House of Commons ; for 
 they were unprepared for it, and would be taken by sur- 
 prise ; while the Roman Catholic members had, some of 
 them, received warning ; and others had nice berths pre- 
 pared for them. The Tory Orangemen, he said further, 
 would be shunted off from the one side, and the Radical 
 Nonconformists from the other. 
 
 In the elections of 1874, Mr. Gladstone proved to be in 
 a minority. He then formally resigned the leadership of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 87 
 
 the Liberal party ; and ostentatiously sat in the House, 
 on the Prime Minister's Bench, as merely a supporter, and 
 almost as an outsider. He devoted himself to literary 
 work. Let us endeavour to judge of the aim of his 
 literary efforts from the character of his effusions. Here 
 are a few examples : In the Contemporary Review, of 
 July, 1875, he wrote an article on this question: "Is the 
 " Church of England worth Preserving ? " The following 
 were the views which he enforced : " It may be said, What 
 " is this internal Union of the Church, which is professed 
 " to be of such value ? We have within it, men who build, 
 " or who suppose themselves to build their religion only 
 " upon their private judgment, unequally yoked with those 
 " who acknowledge the guiding value of the Christian his- 
 " tory and witness ; men who believe in a Visible Church, 
 " and men who do not ; men who desire a further Refor- 
 " mation, and men who think the Reformation we have 
 " had already, went too far ; men who think a Church 
 " exists for the custody and teaching of the truth, and 
 " men who view it as a magazine for the collection and 
 " parade of all sorts of opinions, for all sorts of customers. 
 " Nay, besides all this, are there not those who, with such 
 " concealment only as prudence may require, question the 
 " authority of Holy Scripture, and doubt or dissolve into 
 " misty figure even the cardinal facts of our Redemption 
 " enshrined in the Apostles' Creed ? What Union com- 
 " patible with the avowed or unavowed existence of these 
 " diversities can deserve the name, or can be worth paying a 
 "price to maintain ? " 
 
 This article was followed up by an article "On the 
 " Courses of Religious Thought," which appeared in the 
 Contemporary Review, of June 26, 1876. The following in 
 effect were Mr. Gladstone's positions : " Men are divided 
 " by their principles. In religious matters there are no 
 " more than two principles ; and they are contradictory : 
 " The Liberty of voluntarily submitting Reason and Will 
 " to the Divine Reason and Will ; or else, Liberty in the
 
 88 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " sense of man's independence of anything superior to 
 "himself. The latter is the Anti-Christian principle. It 
 " is the license to manufacture one's own belief, and one's 
 "own morality. Mahommedanism is not a species of 
 " Theism ; because it appeals, not to man's Reason, but 
 "to his Faith. Mahommed founded a positive Religion. 
 "The Anti-Christian principle gets rid of all that has 
 " gone before, and says that each man must make his 
 " own doctrine and belief." Mr. Gladstone then enlarged, 
 with amorous fervour, on " the Ecclesia docens" and said 
 further : " The Ultramontane system . . . derives its 
 " origin, by an unbroken succession, from Christ and His 
 " Apostles. ... It undeniably contains within itself a 
 " large portion of undivided religious life of Christendom. 
 " The faith, the hope, the charity, which it was the office 
 " of the Gospel to engender, flourish within this precinct 
 "in the hearts of millions upon millions." So the ultra- 
 Roman Catholics imagine! But Protestants know that 
 the "succession from Christ and His Apostles" has been 
 broken over and over again ; and that Cardinal Baronius 
 himself testifies to the fact. Even according to the princi- 
 ples of the Ultramontanes, there has not been for centuries 
 a genuine Pope or Cardinal. Yet Mr. Gladstone professed 
 his belief in the unbroken succession of Ultramontanism 
 from Christ and His Apostles ! He goes further than 
 that, and contradicts Mr. P. J. Smyth, late Member for 
 Westmeath ; for Mr. Gladstone believes that faith, hope, 
 and charity, " flourish within the precinct (of the Church 
 " of Rome) in the hearts of millions upon millions." Mr. 
 Smyth, and every one who knew Ireland, looked on the 
 Popish Church as "a repudiation of the Decalogue an 
 " outrage on the fundamental principles of morality, and 
 " a negation of the dogmas of Christianity. The animating 
 " principle of the organization (the ' great whole,' which 
 " comprises the 'Land League, National League, Parliamen- 
 " ' tary Party, Invincible Society, and Dynamite Society') is 
 " hatred, bitter, rancorous, relentless hatred ... an indi-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 " vidual, personal hatred, which pursues the victim from the 
 " public platform to the domestic hearth." So wrote Mr. P. 
 J. Symth, the Roman Catholic Member, on his death-bed. 
 
 In the life of Bishop Wilberforce (Vol. iii. p. 162) there 
 appears a letter from Mr. Gladstone to the late Bishop, 
 dated July 21, 1865, and containing the following words: 
 " There have been two great deaths, or transmigrations of 
 " spirit, in my political existence : the one very slow, the 
 " breaking of ties with my original party ; the other very 
 "short and sharp, the breaking of the tie with Oxford. 
 " There will probably be a third and no more" Mr. Glad- 
 stone did not pretend to prophesy. They were evidently 
 rather the words of a man who was conscious of a change 
 of belief; of a man who was aware that he held and 
 acted on the principles which he expressed in the Contem- 
 porary Review ; and who knew that the day must come 
 when he would have to declare himself openly. 
 
 In the Nineteenth Century v of March, 1877, there appeared 
 a contribution from the pen of Mr. Gladstone. Here are 
 some extracts to show his bias. By Christianity he " does 
 " not mean the mere acknowledgment of a name ; but we 
 "mean, along with other things, the acceptance of a body 
 " of truths." After mentioning the gradual embodiment 
 of these truths in the Creeds, and in the definitions which 
 have from time to time been published in condemnation 
 of various heresies, he says : This Christianity " has been 
 " handed on continuously in uniformity of life. ... It 
 " is in this sense what the Visible Church also claims to be, 
 " a city set on a hill ; not, indeed, a city within walls that 
 " cannot either grow nor dwindle ; but yet a city widely 
 "spread, with a fixed heart and Centre, if with a fluctuating 
 " outline ; a mass alike unchangeable, perceptible, and also 
 " determinate ; not absolutely or mathematically ; but in a 
 " sufficient degree for its providential purpose the Educa- 
 " tion of Mankind. . . . The Christianity which claims 
 "our obedience, is a Christianity inspired, sacramental, ethical, 
 " embodied in certain great historic documents, involving cer-
 
 90 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " tain profoundly powerful and operative doctrinal con- 
 "ceptions. A great mass and momentum of Authority 
 " may be pleaded for much that lies beyond the outline 
 " I have drawn. Nearly half the Christian world adopts the 
 "entire Roman System" 
 
 No. XVI. 
 
 HONEST, open-hearted Englishmen are reckoned "stupid" 
 on the Continent ! They are not stupid ; but they find it 
 hard to believe in a long-continued duplicity, and realize 
 ingenious subterfuges. A Prince with whom I was one 
 day conversing about the Jesuits, their intrigues in Eng- 
 land, and their tools in the House of Commons, said : 
 " Yes ! I can well believe you ; we are accustomed to such 
 " things in Austria, and know what the Jesuits are ; but 
 "you will not get English people to believe a word of 
 " what is going on." Take any Englishman who has been 
 accustomed to fair dealing, and has not contracted the 
 habits of artifice and falsehood, and reveal to him a part 
 of the conspiracy to Romanize England. He will smile in 
 your face, shake his head, and turn away, thinking that 
 you are either cracked, or trying to deceive him. Yet 
 there are some reflecting, hard-headed, shrewd Englishmen, 
 who have put facts together, and drawn their conclusions. 
 Mr. Arundel Rogers stood, in the Conservative interest, 
 for the borough of Bodmin, and, it appears, openly gave 
 expression to his belief that Mr. Gladstone "was a 
 " Romanist and a Jesuit." He was laughed at, and failed 
 in his election. What happened ? He was silenced for 
 the future, by receiving from Mr. D' Israeli, in February, 
 1879, the appointment of Judge of the County Court 
 circuit No. 27, with a salary of 1,500 a year. Perhaps, 
 as a lawyer, he had learned not altogether to trust to pro- 
 fessions and assertions ; but judged for himself, and drew 
 his own conclusions from their acts. 
 
 If we judge Mr. Gladstone by his acts, and come to the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 91 
 
 conclusion that his sympathies are with the Roman 
 Church ; then we must see what a difficult position he was 
 placed in, even while Mr. D'Israeli was alive, and able, 
 under the semblance of an opponent, to back him up and 
 save him, in the interest of a common cause. Let us take 
 an example of his difficult position. On November 16, 
 1868, the Rev. W. Walker Jubb wrote to Mr. Gladstone 
 asking whether he intended to abolish the Maynooth 
 grant ? Mr. Gladstone replied : " Not only my own de- 
 "claration upon every occasion, but the resolution unani- 
 " mously passed by the House of Commons, bind me in 
 "honour, as I am bound in purpose and conviction, to 
 "propose that the Regium Donum and the Maynooth 
 "grant should be wound up, and should cease with the 
 " Irish Church Establishment. Can words go further ? " 
 Early in 1869, Mr. Gladstone proposed and carried a gift 
 of more than ,400,000 to the Roman Catholic College of 
 Maynooth, as a "fair compensation " for the withdrawal of 
 the vote which the House of Commons was annually asked 
 to pass, a vote of ^25,000, which might any year be re- 
 fused ; for this he gave sixteen years' purchase ! Did Mr. 
 Gladstone's honour, like Bob Acre's, ooze out of his fingers' 
 ends ? Or had he changed his views, in a quarter of a 
 year, as to the requirements of honour ? 
 
 In April, 1880, Mr. Gladstone made a speech at Dal- 
 meny, in which he related the following narrative, and 
 added his own comments : " There is a story, not altogether 
 "inappropriate, told about Sir Walter Scott. When he 
 " was asked if he was the author of the Waverley novels, he 
 " replied : ' No ; and if I had written them, I should have 
 " ' made you precisely the same answer.' " That was the 
 narrative. Honest-minded persons would have taken Sir 
 Walter Scott's answer as a direct denial. What were Mr. 
 Gladstone's comments ? " / do not think you can say that 
 "in making this answer, Sir Walter Scott was guilty of 
 "deceit. His answer was: 'No, I have not,' with the fair 
 "notice, on the supposition that, if he had written the
 
 92 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " novels, that would have been his answer. / do not see 
 " myself how you can object to it." I am quite aware that 
 Mr. Gladstone was borne out in this un-English view, by 
 the doctrine of the great Jesuit casuists ; and although 
 plain Englishmen and Scotchmen would imagine that 
 Walter Scott told a lie, yet, according to the Jesuit 
 teachers and Mr. Gladstone, there was no guilt attached to 
 it. The Jesuit Sanchez, for example, wrote : " One may 
 " be allowed to swear that one has not done a thing that 
 "one has actually done, so long as one understands within 
 " one's self that one has not done it on a certain day, or 
 "before one was born; or while secretly meaning some 
 "other like circumstance. And this is extremely con- 
 " venient when health, honour, or interest are concerned.' 
 This is the well-known Jesuit doctrine of " Mental Reserva- 
 tion." There is another Jesuit doctrine which they find 
 equally convenient, the doctrine of "Good Intention." 
 According to the Jesuit teachers, no act is sinful unless it 
 be done with the intention to offend God thereby ; so that 
 it is not sinful to lie, or to commit murder, if the end be 
 the welfare or the glory of the Church of Rome. 
 
 But let us leave the Jesuit teachers, with the hope that 
 Mr. Gladstone never moulds his conduct according to their 
 doctrines. It will be remembered that, when the General 
 Election of January and February, 1874, terminated in the 
 destruction of Mr. Gladstone's Government, and the utter 
 discomfiture of the Liberal party, Mr. Gladstone formally 
 resigned the leadership. Every politician held that the 
 Liberal party had been irretrievably shattered by him ; 
 that it was done for ; and Mr. Gladstone refused to lead 
 it any more. Lord Hartington was elected leader in Mr. 
 Gladstone's place. By dint of patient labour he resusci- 
 tated and reorganized his party. In December, 1879, i 
 was known that a dissolution would soon be decreed, and 
 a general election would take place. No one would follow 
 Mr. Gladstone at that time : " he had ruined the Liberal 
 " party ; he was rash ; no one knew what he would do
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 93 
 
 "next"; and one baronet considered that "Mr. Gladstone 
 "had Romanist sympathies." Lord Hartington, on the 
 other hand, was a moderate man ; he was steady-going ; 
 " the moderate men of both sides could support him." And 
 Lord Hartington was the accepted leader ; and the future 
 Prime Minister, if ever the Liberal party should gain the 
 ascendency. On December 8, 1879, for example, the Daily 
 News said : " Lord Granville and Lord Hartington have, 
 " for many years, had the labour of conducting the Liberal 
 "party through a period of Opposition more difficult and 
 " more trying than any it has known since the Reform Act 
 "of 1832. The proposal to displace them in what it is 
 "hoped is the moment of victory seems wanting in 
 "generosity as well as prudence. The effect of such a 
 " measure, and even of the groundless apprehension of such 
 " a measure, would certainly be to alienate large numbers of 
 " the Liberal party, whose cordial support is essential in the 
 "great national struggle which is now probably but a few 
 " months distant." Thus was Mr. Gladstone carefully kept 
 in the background. The expectation that he would be 
 Prime Minister would have been disastrous. As I shall 
 show hereafter, it was desired in the Papal Court of Rome 
 that the two great parties should be very evenly balanced, so 
 that the Irish Roman Catholic party should be able to turn 
 the scale either way, and thus be in a position to exact any 
 terms they liked from either party. Mr. D'Israeli's Whip, 
 during the election, told me that the Conservatives 
 expected to be returned with " a working majority of 
 " twenty-five.'! Mr. Adam, the Liberal Whip, told me that 
 he expected the Conservatives would have a majority of 
 twenty. In order not to interfere with that arrangement, 
 it was necessary not to ruin the prospects of the Liberal 
 party by the mention of Mr. Gladstone's name. He had 
 inspired far too great a distrust. 
 
 By the middle of April the English and Scotch elections 
 had already been decided ; the Liberal electors having 
 rallied under Lord Hartington's name, and secured, so far,
 
 94 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 a victory for the Liberal party. The Irish elections were 
 still pending ; when (April 19) a telegram came from Rome 
 to the Pall Mall Gazette, in these terms : " Cardinal 
 "Manning has assured the Pope that large concessions to 
 " the Roman Catholic Church may be expected from the 
 "Liberals (i.e. from Mr. Gladstone). The nomination of 
 " Lord Ripon as Viceroy of Ireland is devoutly hoped for 
 "at the Vatican." It must be remembered that, on the 
 solicitation of a Roman Catholic professor, Mr. St. George 
 Mivart, Mr. Gladstone had signed a " Declaration " consist- 
 ing of seven propositions on the subject of Education, which 
 M. Le Play (a Roman Catholic) had drawn up. Mr. 
 Gladstone "cordially accepted" them. They were also 
 subscribed by Lords Coleridge, Carlingford, O'Hagan, 
 Selborne, Ripon, and Rosebery. 1 This document had 
 been held back ; but was now published in Ireland, to 
 Mr. Gladstone's advantage. This was done because it was 
 now evident that Mr. D'Israeli, or rather, Lord Beaconsfield, 
 could not obtain " a working majority." The Irish elections 
 were now imminent. A Liberal Government must come in ; 
 and therefore Mr. Gladstone, not Lord Hartington, must 
 be at the head of it. The struggle with Lord Hartington 
 for the leadership was about to open. During the English 
 and Scotch elections, the country had been continually 
 reassured by the promise that Mr. Gladstone would not 
 take office, and that Lord Hartington, the "safe man," 
 would be Prime Minister. But Lord Hartington must, in 
 the interests of the Roman Church, be deposed. Every 
 one was now told to forget who had " wrecked his party " ; 
 who had "abandoned the wreck to its fate"; who had 
 endeavoured, ever since 1874, to keep the Liberal party in 
 a state of confusion and disintegration. They were told, 
 too, to forget Lord Hartington, who had patiently laboured 
 to reduce the wreck to something like order, and had 
 succeeded. 
 
 From the middle of April, the Daily News wrote up 
 1 Dublin Evening Mail, May 14, 1879.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 95 
 
 Mr. Gladstone, and wrote down Lords Granville and 
 Hartington. The instances, many and various, between 
 1874 and 1880, when Mr. Gladstone had suddenly emerged 
 from his retirement, and plunged into the arena of debate, 
 in order to renew the distractions and discomfitures of the 
 Liberal party, were now put aside. It was to the interest 
 of the Roman Church that, if Beaconsfield was to go out, 
 Mr. Gladstone must come in. Nor was this tone confined 
 to the Liberal newspapers alone. During April, Mr. 
 Gladstone's political opponents employed arguments and 
 eloquence to show that Mr. Gladstone was the only man 
 for the situation. His unrivalled powers ; his half-century 
 of experience ; his various achievements ; were appealed 
 to by the journals under Lord Beaconsfield's influence. 
 They, one and all, were nervously anxious lest Mr. Glad- 
 stone should lose the proper reward for his newly-found 
 merits. They said, forsooth, that Mr. Gladstone's retirement 
 from public life would consolidate and strengthen the 
 Liberal party ; therefore he must not retire. What ! did 
 they desire to ruin their country in order to benefit their 
 party ? or had the Roman Catholics some writers on the 
 staff of every paper, who could mould them in the Papal 
 interest ? And did not the Conservative members, candi- 
 dates, and journals, write and speak according to a mot 
 cTordre which had emanated from a hidden Council ? But 
 then, why did the Liberal journals also conspire to urge 
 so vehemently that Mr. Gladstone should seize the helm 
 of affairs ? Perhaps the mot d'ordre for them, also, had 
 proceeded from the same Council. All the public prints, 
 from quarterlies and monthlies down to the halfpenny 
 Echo, all, of every shade of politics, for once sang in 
 unison. It was evidently a critical time. But the 
 Jesuits were again victorious. The Queen sent for Lord 
 Hartington, it is true. Lord Hartington and Lord Gran- 
 ville went together to Mr. Gladstone, and found him sur- 
 rounded by mental torpedoes. " I feel how inadequate I 
 " am to fulfil the heavy task which her Majesty has im-
 
 9 6 
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "posed upon me-" said Lord Hartington. "Of course 
 " I am the only man, under the circumstances ; but 
 "aivc you, both, places in my Cabinet." So the two 
 astounded Ministers returned to the Queen, and 
 Gladstone was sent for. He came in, and showed 
 gratitude by making Lord Ripon, Viceroy of India ; 1 
 Kenmare, Lord Chamberlain ; Lord Herries, Lord 
 tenant of the East Riding ; Lord O'Hagan, Lord 
 cellor of Ireland all Roman Catholics ; while he orderec 
 that in future, the teaching in the Malta University 
 and 'Lyceum should be purely Catholic. 
 " ^ratifying intelligence " of the Osservatore Romano. 
 
 ^Before the elections of 1880, the country had witnesse 
 again and again, what they thought to be attacks on Lord 
 Beaconsfield's policy, by Mr. Gladstone. Those who were 
 nearer to the fountain-head, observed that every time 
 pretended to attack, he trailed a red herring across 
 scent He always blinked the weak points in his pretended 
 enemy, and drew attention off from the real issues, to 
 expend his rhetorical vehemence and ammunition on the 
 parts of Mr D'Israeli's policy which were invulnerable, 
 acquitted them of their faults, and attacked them for their 
 virtues. This helped to keep Lord Beaconsfield at the 
 head of affairs. When it was seen that Lord Beaconsfield 
 must be beaten at the polls, and that the Liberal party 
 must triumph, then every effort was at once turned to de- 
 throne Lord Hartington, and put Mr. Gladstone in his place. 
 Since the day that Mr. Gladstone has been Prime Minister, 
 he has associated the Liberal party with false principles, 
 fallacies, crude and socialistic theories as to property, an 
 propositions which create hostility of classes, 
 humbled and broken down the British Empire in the face 
 of the world, in accordance with Cardinal Manning's pro- 
 gramme "to subdue, to break, to subjugate an Imperial 
 ' race." He cannot be either a genuine patriot, or a tru< 
 friend.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 97 
 
 No. XVII. 
 
 I HAVE mentioned the endeavour, continued through many 
 years, to break up the two great parties of the State, and 
 form a new party in the interests of the Roman Church ; 
 and, that scheme failing, or as subsidiary to that scheme, 
 there has been an attempt for many years to get rid of the 
 House of Commons, and the representative system, already 
 condemned by the Pope, and hated by the Jesuits, alto- 
 gether. The latter conspiracy will become apparent on 
 the consideration of the systematic " obstruction," which 
 has been reduced to an art in Parliament. To the former, 
 an allusion is made in a letter to Archbishop Manning, 
 dated December 10, 1873. "Butt is, in part at least, 
 "doing the work of the Catholics in Ireland, as your Grace 
 " explained to me beforehand." It is alluded to, also, in 
 a long letter to a Jesuit rector, in January, 1874, of which 
 I give extracts, together with his answer : " Gladstone is 
 " in continual communication with the Archbishop (Man- 
 " ning), and consults him very openly as to his measures 
 "and appointments. This I know. So there he stands 
 " for one. Now as to the other side, namely D'Israeli's and 
 
 " . I know of their unity, both from what the latter 
 
 " told me, . . . and because when, to test the matter, 
 " I spoke, many years ago, to D' Israeli on the subject, he 
 " turned very pale, and his teeth chattered. ... More- 
 "over, as you know, Mr. D'Israeli sent me to Cardinal 
 " Antonelli, to remind him that he (D'Israeli) had always 
 " done what he could, and intended to do what he could 
 "for the (Roman) Catholic Church . . . Moreover, 
 " D'Israeli told me of his negotiations with the Irish 
 " bishops, and said that his quarrel was only with the 
 "Archbishop. ... As to Butt, and Home Rule, if 
 " Ireland were to have a Parliament of her own, and Scot- 
 " land too, Irish legislation would be (Roman) Catholic ; 
 " the omnipotence of Parliament would be reduced to in- 
 
 H
 
 9 g RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "significance," etc. The reply from the Jesuit rector is 
 dated January 24, 1874. "I shall expect to see you at 
 "two p.m. in in, Mount Street. I have every intention 
 " of answering your letter when we meet. It shall not be 
 " my fault that you indulge in any erroneous impressions. 
 "The Dissolution has come rather suddenly on the world" 
 The result of the interview was a confirmation of my 
 
 surmises. 
 
 I have given these extracts ; but before proceedu 
 the consideration of them, it is necessary, in consequence 
 of what has been said on the subject of Mr. D'Israeli, t< 
 strengthen that position ; and then we shall proceed to the 
 consideration of the plot to break up both political parties, 
 by the action of their two political leaders. On Septem- 
 ber 20, 1 86 1, the Earl of Eglinton and Winton addressed 
 himself to a crypto-Jesuit, and died very shortly after. 
 That crypto-Jesuit, on October 6, wrote as follows to me : 
 " You must have received, from the death of Lord Eglin- 
 " ton, a painful shock ; and you can imagine how it fell 
 "upon me. The wretched night I have spent has led, 
 "however, to this, that I have resolved to let Lord Derby 
 "know his late colleague's concurrence with us. 
 He knows not how far this will have spread. 
 " consult. With whom will he consult ? D'Israeli. 
 " then is what is to be considered : What D'Israeli will say, 
 ' and what effect his words will have ? But first we have 
 " to consider the manner in which the question will be put, 
 "and the effect of the manner of D'Israeli when it is put. 
 " Will it be a question generally about me, concealing 
 " occasion ? Or will it be a communication of my letter ? 
 "... By referring him to Mr. D'Israeli, as one completely 
 " in a position to afford evidence in confirmation of all that 
 ' is inferred, appending thereto the condition that he, Lord 
 " Derby, should find means to induce D'Israeli to^ make 
 " candid' and unreserved admissions, I can say that, in that 
 "case he would receive from Mr. D'Israeli assurance of his 
 " complete concurrence -with me in every point, internal and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 99 
 
 "external. I here quote the words of Mr. U Israeli himself. 
 " Those words, indeed, but cover the ground down to the 
 " period removed from the present by more than eight 
 " years. But events have flowed on in the same current 
 " since then ; and each of those events is but additional 
 " testimony. The convictions so avowed have, indeed, been 
 " confirmed by public declaration. But, as the general course 
 " of Mr. D'Israeli's public life has been in an opposite sense 
 " (i.e. professing to lead the great Protestant party), the 
 "proposition that the confession of the truth has to be 
 " obtained from him . . . bears a show of reason on 
 " its face, which may prevent it from being cast aside as at 
 "once frivolous and offensive." This puts Mr. D'Israeli's 
 concurrence beyond doubt or cavil. It also shows that Mr. 
 D'Israeli's public professions, in an opposite sense, were an 
 acknowledged and recognised part of the intrigue. A short 
 time afterwards (May 8, 1862), Mr. DTsraeli took occasion 
 to proclaim his concurrence again. He said : " There is 
 "a question connected with Rome which I apprehend in- 
 " terests the world generally, which is, I think, peculiarly 
 " interesting to a Protestant power like England and 
 " that is not the Temporal Power, but the independence of 
 " the Pope. They are two things entirely distinct, although 
 " they are always mixed together, partly through blunder- 
 "ing, and partly owing to international misrepresentation." 
 Then, considering the case of England, "a Protestant power 
 "having many millions of Roman Catholic subjects," he 
 said : " We in England should look with great jealousy 
 " on the Pope's becoming a permanent resident in the 
 " dominions of a Roman Catholic State ; because we know 
 " that (although as a Temporal Prince he is of no more 
 " account than any small Italian Duke) he is a Spiritual 
 " Prince, exercising great power in every country, and in 
 " every country represented by an organized intellectual 
 " Body. It is, therefore, a matter of very great considera- 
 " tion for English statesmen, that the Potentate exercising 
 " this authority should be placed in a situation in which he
 
 100 
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 should not be unduly influenced by any other Power in 
 ' Europe " The morning after this speech, there we 
 virulent objurgations in all the Protestant journals. 
 Morning Post, for example, asserted that the Conservative 
 country gentlemen "writhed under the part which Mr 
 "Disraeli made them play," yet they "implicitly obeyec 
 " him Loyola (it continued) in his dying moments c 
 'tated his inmost thoughts. They were, that the enti 
 "system of the Order was summed up in Obedience; t 
 "the true Jesuit should become, at the bidding of 
 General of the Order, as devoid of individual will an 
 "motion as a corpse, to?/ cadaver, and 
 "stick of an old man, senis baculus,K>te taken up 
 " thrown aside at pleasure. And this is the state to which 
 " Mr D'Israeli has reduced his puppets. . . 
 Jesuitism Because they do so, they are Jesuits ; for, a 
 Carlyle truly says : Whenever you meet a man believing 
 "in the salutary nature of falsehoods . . 
 "ing that, to serve the good cause, he must call the devil 
 " his aid there you have a follower of Ignatius." 
 
 On the 1 2th of September, 1877, a letter was wn 
 bv a Roman Catholic member, to an experienced Jesuit, 
 in which the following words occur: "In many ways 
 Parliament not only stops good being done, but is als. 
 source of injury. To break it up into three or four bod 
 "for local administration, would weaken The Omnipotence 
 "of Parliament." The reply was as follows : To retrieve 
 "the political system in the way you suggest, is the 
 "method that can save it ; and might even save it at 
 "eleventh hour. / need hardly tell you that this is what 
 "/, and others, have been working at for all these man, 
 
 very year there was an example of the multi- 
 farious means of breaking down parties. When 
 Salisbury was at Constantinople, his " political allies am 
 "friends," so far from supporting and defending him, did al 
 they could to discredit him; and it was even hmtec
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 101 
 
 he was exceeding his instructions. " The line taken 
 " with respect to him (said the Times of January n, 1877) 
 " can scarcely be misunderstood. . . . Nothing can be 
 " more reckless than these attempts to undo what our 
 "plenipotentiary is doing." The Times was puzzled at 
 this reckless, and apparently shortsighted conduct ; be- 
 cause, as the Times said, it was very evident that " it 
 "would go far to break up the Administration." But 
 what if the end in view was to break up the party ? Then 
 there would have been no puzzle at all. The Moscow 
 Gazette of January 1st contained a confirmation of the 
 intelligence of the Times. It said : " Lord Beaconsfield 
 " . . . sent out to Constantinople a secret agent of his 
 " own, who passed through Russia, stopping at Kishnief 
 " on the way (to oppose and thwart the Marquis of Salis- 
 bury). Lord Salisbury, it is said, becoming aware of 
 "his designs, and of the intrigues of Sir Henry Elliot, 
 " telegraphed to London that if Elliot was not immediately 
 "recalled, he would at once leave the Conference and 
 " Constantinople ; in consequence of which, Sir Henry 
 " Elliot was ordered to go on sick leave." 
 
 Now let us take an example of similar action on the 
 other side. Look at the Times of May 5, 1877. "Mr. 
 "Gladstone's resolutions threaten to do something more 
 " tJian throw the Liberal party into confusion. In ordinary 
 "times, the breaking of party bonds, whether Liberal 
 "or Conservative, might, no doubt, be borne with serenity ; 
 "but these are not ordinary times." It then charged 
 Mr. Gladstone with "destroying the effective force of 
 " the Liberal party at this critical moment," and added, 
 "thus the Liberal party is split into factions, some of 
 " which will vote for Mr. Gladstone's resolutions, and 
 "others for the Previous Question. The rent may too 
 " easily grow wider." After two days of thoughtful con- 
 sideration, the leading journal reiterated its indictment : 
 " By a curious perversity, Mr. Gladstone has framed a set 
 " of resolutions which will do the maximum of evil, by divid-
 
 102 
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " ing the party which is in favour of peace, and strengthen- 
 ' ing that which inclines to war. . . . As a considerable 
 " number might be expected to vote with him, the first effect 
 " would be something like a disruption of the party. Lord 
 " Hartington will thus be placed in a very difficult position. 
 " After Mr. Gladstone insisted on resigning the leadership 
 Lord Hartington was chosen by a unanimous 
 " vote. . . . Now all his calculations have been defeated 
 "by Mr.' Gladstone's raid." The day fixed for the debate 
 was Monday, June u. On Sunday, Mr. Bright called on 
 Mr. Gladstone. He pointed out that a division on t 
 resolutions must break up the Liberal party ; and urge 
 on Mr. Gladstone the necessity of avoiding the threatened 
 rupture. Mr. Gladstone adhered to his intention. 
 you wish then to break up the Liberal party ? " At a late 
 hour, Mr. Bright took Lord Granville with him to the tent 
 of Achilles. The result of the negotiations was the Tre- 
 velyan farce. Mr. Trevelyan asked an appointed question; 
 and Mr. Gladstone acted in a way which proved that his 
 histrionic powers were such as to place him in a high 
 rank, as an actor, than Conway, Coghlan, or Irving, 
 why did Mr. Gladstone agree not to kill the Liberal party ? 
 Was it not because his game had been divined, and been 
 made the subject of rebuke in the public journals ? 
 game had become too dangerous. It might recoil on him- 
 self. The Liberal party might escape from being broken 
 up 'and Mr. Gladstone himself might be broken on the 
 torturing Ixion wheel of exposure and angry publ 
 
 criticism. 
 
 Let us for a moment return to the other side, 
 uary 24, 1878, a Jesuit wrote thus : " A letter came to me 
 " last night from a man who has been working with me, 
 " and had just had a long talk with Beaconsfield." 
 result of that long conversation was thus given : " My 
 "belief is that this Eastern Question will break up the 
 " present (Conservative) Government ; that the old parties 
 "are already broken np, and, having neither of them any
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 103 
 
 " basis of principle, must both go down before a NATIONAL 
 " Party. ... In fact, I believe there is a chance now, 
 " if ever, for the higher principles to be asserted." In Mr. 
 D'Israeli's " Coningsby," published as long ago as 1844, 
 the advent was foretold of a New Party that should abjure 
 the stupid statesmanship of Conservatives and Liberals, 
 of Tories and Whigs, and should constitute a National 
 Party on the principle of a TORY DEMOCRACY. 
 
 NO. XVIII. 
 
 IT is some years since a Jesuit said to me: "We have 
 " abolished the distinction between Whig and Tory ; the 
 " Government of the country is not by party." Conserva- 
 tism and Liberalism have, it is true, ceased to be more 
 than names. Mr. D'Israeli's Reform Bill of 1867, which 
 established household suffrage, was the burial of that dis- 
 tinction of names. Another Jesuit, on February 14, 1878, 
 said to me : " I may tell you that what I have, for some 
 " time, been working at secretly, is to break up both parties. 
 ". . . The only thing is to break up both parties, and 
 "to form a really national party, on the basis of law." It 
 seemed that Mr. Gladstone lent his assistance, as far as he 
 could venture, to this secret working. In a speech on July 
 21, 1878, for example, he said : " It is sometimes said, gen- 
 " tlemen, that in this country there is very little difference 
 " between the ins and the outs, except that one set of them 
 " happens to be in possession of office, and that the other 
 " set is in expectation of office. Well, gentlemen, I can 
 "quote the sarcastic description without feeling myself 
 " stung by it, for I am neither in possession of office nor in 
 " expectation of it." In a year and a half he was working 
 hard to wrench, out of Lord Hartington's grasp, the leader- 
 ship of the Liberal party and the Premiership, which was 
 then looming close at hand. Yet, doubtless, he said truly, 
 in 1878, that he was not in expectation of office, because
 
 104 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 he thought that he had effectually broken up the Liberal 
 party. The next day, July 22, the Times thus judged : " If 
 " Mr. Gladstone were bent on completing the ruin of his 
 " party, he could scarcely attain his purpose better than by 
 " driving them to a contest for which they are at present 
 " unprepared." The mistake Mr. Gladstone made, the 
 reason why he was not successful in completing the ruin of 
 the Liberal party, was probably his neglect of the fact that 
 the Conservative party had been still more weakened by 
 Mr. D'Israeli ; so that the Liberal party, after all Mr. Glad- 
 stone's efforts, was still relatively the stronger of the two. 
 Moreover, Mr. Gladstone, by that speech of July 21, had 
 contributed to weaken and pulverise the Conservative party 
 still more. He said : " Lord Salisbury was sent to Con- 
 " stantinople to act a part which we afterwards found it 
 "had been decided in England should be nothing but a 
 "farce "; and so forth. 
 
 A letter written a few days afterwards to a Jesuit (July 
 29) is now before me, and speaks for itself: "There seems 
 "to be another little comedy on the stage, which may 
 " amuse, if it be not of use. A gentleman who was (and 
 " perhaps still is) on the staff of Times correspondents, told 
 " me yesterday and I have heard similar reports from 
 " other sources that Gladstone forced the resolutions of 
 " to-night upon Hartington, who wanted to wait merely ; 
 " and that the other Liberal leaders were not consulted. 
 " These resolutions, as you know, are utterly wide of any 
 " real point of attack. This morning I have read Beacons- 
 " field's speech. It professes to defend the Government 
 " against an attack in the House of Commons ; but touches 
 " only on two points of Hartington's resolutions. That is 
 "two points not of real, but of feigned, attack, which 
 "require no defence, are defended ; and they are defended 
 "because the Ministry in the House of Commons are 
 " assumed by Beaconsfield to be unable to defend them ! " 
 There could be no better way to break the Conservative 
 party to pieces, than for the leader of it to give out that
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 105 
 
 none of the Conservative Ministry were worth a straw. 
 At the beginning of August, the various " weeklies " be- 
 wailed the condition of the Liberal party, which they 
 attributed to " the hollowness of Mr. Gladstone's Bulgarian 
 " agitation," and to his other " eccentric moves," which had 
 been silently producing "a sullen indignation." The con- 
 clusion was thus expressed in one of the ablest of them : 
 " At any rate, whether the political blunder was intentional 
 " or unintended, the whole party is paying the penalty for 
 "it in an unpopularity so deep, that it has done much to 
 " call off public attention from the tergiversation of their 
 "adversaries!* For those adversaries were busy breaking 
 up their own party also. The Jesuit organ, the Civilta 
 Cattolica, of October 19, 1878, thus informed its obedient 
 readers : " The state of disintegration of the Liberal party 
 " still continues. Mr. Gladstone has succeeded, by means 
 " of his sophisms, in demoralizing utterly the great Liberal 
 " phalanx, of which he was formerly the leader. A recent 
 " article of his, inserted in an American review, will certainly 
 " not have the effect of smoothing over tJie differences in the 
 "Liberal party." 
 
 Lord Beaconsfield was not idle in playing his counter- 
 part rdle. He, too, was assiduously breaking up his (the 
 Conservative) party. He had already discredited Lord 
 Salisbury. He now removed Mr. Hardy the most effec- 
 tive debater, and the natural Leader of the Conservative 
 Party in the House of Commons. Mr. Hardy was made 
 Viscount Cranbrook, and was transferred from the War 
 Office, where he conspicuously succeeded, to the India 
 Office where he failed. A letter of January 29th, 1879, 
 marks another step in the process of discouragement and 
 disintegration : "There is little doubt that the Government 
 " will introduce a Roman Catholic University Bill. It is 
 " part of a programme of Disraeli's, which he privately 
 "explained in March, 1871. Some Conservatives are 
 " already crying out that such a measure, whether carried 
 " or not, will damage the Conservative party in the elec-
 
 ro5 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " tions, which cannot be far distant. That of course ! . . . 
 ' I understand that some of the Cabinet wished to dissolve 
 " at once, before this Bill should be introduced ; and also, 
 " before any failure should occur in carrying out the Berlin 
 " Treaty. In which case (i.e. by an immediate Dissolu- 
 tion) D'lsraeli would, of course, have a majority bigger 
 " than ever. Of course, therefore, D'lsraeli declined to agree 
 
 " to if." 
 
 While Lord Beaconsfield was employed, like a bar 
 in secretly working the ruin of the Conservative party, Mr. 
 Gladstone 1 "threw the people back again on the Ministry, 
 "by the proclamation of extravagant and untenabl 
 "opinions. Mr. Gladstone has, more than once, done Jm 
 "opponents this kind of service during his Scottish cam- 
 " pai^n." In March, 1880, the expected Dissolution came, 
 It proved that everyone of the "Great Statesmen" had 
 miscalculated. The Achitophels were dumb-foundered 
 Just before the elections, an article on the situation ap- 
 peared in the Jesuit Review, the Civil fd Cattolica, of April 
 3 1880. It vaticinated thus: "It is regarded as very 
 "'probable that Lord Beaconsfield will return to powe 
 "with a narrow working majority; or, if not, that 
 " Liberals will have such a narrow majority that they will 
 " both be utterly dependent on the Irish vote. ... It i 
 " possible, also, that the persistent clamours and continual 
 "manifestations of the Liberal leaders may produce a 
 " greater effect than may reasonably be supposed. . 
 " Yet it is thought that the common sense of the English 
 " will know how to repel all exaggerations, and preserve 
 " with constancy its vaunted loyalty. . . . Ireland, which 
 "has been for so long a time one of the glories of the Church, 
 " is now passing through a very grave crisis, the outcome 
 of which will decide her future, one way or the other." 
 The next number of that Jesuit Review thus expressed 
 its hope: "In case the Government majority should be 
 diminished, tlie Home Rulers will occupy, in the new 
 1 Times, December 23, 1879.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 107 
 
 " House of Commons, a position of immense importance, 
 " which, if it be used with prudence and moderation, will 
 " be likely to secure lasting benefits for Ireland." 
 
 The disintegrating process, however, had been too active, 
 during the beginning of the year, on the constitution of the 
 Conservative party. Lord Beaconsfield had postponed the 
 elections until the glory of the Berlin Treaty had become 
 tarnished ; and until a miserable budget had discredited 
 the party. Here is a letter of a Tory M.P., dated April 
 4th : " What do you think of the elections ? Do not 
 " answer, like the common herd, that they are unfortunate. 
 11 Things do not happen ; they are done. D'Israeli might 
 " have dissolved soon after the Berlin Conference, and 
 " come back with a sweeping majority ; or at the beginning 
 " of this year, before that miserable budget was brought 
 " in, and before that most ridiculous laughing-stock, the 
 " Water Bill. . . . He is no fool. Those were not mis- 
 "takes. His aim was to break up the Conservative party, 
 " just as Gladstone broke up the Liberal party, by his 
 "sudden dissolution in 1874, and has laboured to keep it 
 "broken up ever since D'Israeli and Gladstone sit on 
 " different sides of the House, but are in one boat, and pull 
 " together" A letter, of a somewhat later date, addressed 
 to a Jesuit, says : " If the two parties had come back very 
 "equal, I could have seen the gain (of dissolving after 
 " the Ministry had been discredited). But now that the 
 " Liberals have an enormous majority, and the ultra- 
 " Radicals are very strong, it seems to put the formation 
 " of a National Party further off than ever." What was 
 the reply ? " I came up to London suddenly, and rather 
 " unexpectedly, yesterday. Like nearly everybody else, I 
 "am quite surprised at the result of the elections. As yet, 
 " it is quite impossible to conjecture the result." The next 
 day (April 11) he avowed that the result of the elections 
 had been " quite unexpected by all of them " ; and that " it 
 "had taken all of them by surprise " ; and that " /'/ was quite 
 " contrary to all their calculations? It was admitted that
 
 io8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Lord Beaconsfield had merely intended to reduce his 
 majority, so that, through an equality of the English 
 parties, the new Irish party might have a greater relative 
 power, and be able to determine the legislation. But it 
 was also avowed that Lord Beaconsfield had " miscalcu- 
 lated his position, and thought himself much stronger 
 " than he proved to be." Achitophel did not at once set 
 his house in order, and hang himself. With that indomit- 
 able perseverance for which Lord Beaconsfield had ever 
 been remarkable, he continued the game of breaking up 
 his party, in behoof of the new Romanist or " National 
 " Party," while Mr. Gladstone clutched at the Premiership 
 and leadership of his party, and played the same game on 
 
 his side. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone began by framing the most intricate 
 piece of legislation which could enter the heart or im- 
 agination of man to conceive. It was a veritable 
 Mystery of Iniquity, which no one but he could under- 
 stand ; and which no one, not even he, could explain. 
 If any incautious member showed a sign of mastering its 
 details, he was promptly confused, and hopelessly muddled, 
 by an explanatory speech from Mr. Gladstone. The 
 " Disturbance Bill " met with the fate it deserved, and 
 brought about those results which it had been calculated 
 to bring on the Liberal party. Not satisfied, Mr. Glad- 
 stone, next year (1881) tried how far he could humbug 
 and drive his obedient followers into accepting all the 
 principles of Communism. His followers had forgotten 
 Prince Bismarck's despatches to Prince Reuss, in which he 
 proclaimed that the Communists and Jesuits were in strict 
 union, if not identical ; just as it has also been shown that 
 the Jesuits make the Nihilism of Russia, and the Feni- 
 anism of Ireland. Yet Mr. Gladstone's followers swal- 
 lowed the principle of Communism, which he had wrapped 
 up in the clauses and sub-sections of the Irish Land Bill. 
 That third branch of " the Upas-tree of Protestant ascen- 
 dency " was the most fatal of all ; and we shall find that, 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 109 
 
 while cutting it down, its virus had served to poison the 
 whole Liberal party, and canker the backbone, and unnerve 
 the sinews of the Conservative party and Protestantism 
 throughout the three Kingdoms. 
 
 I cannot conclude without rehearsing an excellent story 
 which was told me by a gentleman (we will call him 
 Mr. M.) who had managed elections for the Conservative 
 party with the greatest skill, and had succeeded in 
 strengthening that party very much. I relate the story as 
 it was related to me. He was got rid of by Mr. D' Israeli's 
 solicitor, Sir Philip Rose, whom Mr. D'Israeli had made 
 a baronet. In succession to Mr. M., a gentleman was ap- 
 pointed "who sent the wrong candidates to the wrong 
 "constituencies." That was in 1880. After the elections, 
 the conduct of Conservative elections was put into com- 
 mission, the Commissioners being, Lord Salisbury, Mr. 
 W. H. Smith, and Mr. Gorst, Q.C., M.P. The two former 
 went abroad, without giving the matter a moment's 
 attention. Mr. Gorst remained. He was himself a good 
 quarter of the " Fourth Party " (which consisted of Lord 
 Randolph Churchill, Sir H. Drummond Wolff, Mr. Gorst, 
 and Mr. A. Balfour). Mr. M. spoke of this to Mr. Gorst, 
 and said : " You are breaking up the " Conservative party." 
 "Yes," said Mr. Gorst, "that is "precisely our .object." 
 Mr. M. asked what authority he had for doing such a 
 thing? and Mr. Gorst replied: "/ "have the highest 
 autJwrity" He meant Lord Beaconsfield. The next year 
 Lord Beaconsfield went before the dread tribunal of the 
 just Judge of all the earth ; while the whole " Fourth 
 Party," along with Lord Salisbury and Mr. Smith, were 
 placed in the new Government, July 2, 1885
 
 TTO RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. XIX. 
 
 BEFORE examining the New Party which was to be formed 
 in the interests of Romanism, which the reader doubth 
 divines to be the Irish party, we must turn our attention t. 
 the watch-word by which it was formed and united. 
 Home Rule. This idea was started by a Jesuit, as early 
 1847, and fully expounded, in all its bearings, in a 1< 
 " a distinguished member of the Conservative party." 
 thus stated his conclusions : " This is my case, 
 "that I have proved that Ireland was unjustly and unlaw- 
 fully deprived of her Parliament ; that the Treaty of 
 " Union is void ; and that it is expedient for us to grant, 
 " what is it unjust for us to withhold. If we persist at once 
 in our present menaces, and our refusal, the time may 
 " come wltenshe will be enabled to wrench from our weakness 
 "and embarrassments what she would now gladly owe to 
 our generosity. The present difficulty you may pei 
 " get over ; but the circumstances remain. At present ' 
 are at peace ; call tip the image of war, and then consider 
 the back door to England, you have opened in Ireland. 
 The Restoration of the Irish Parliament is 
 -necessary to protect the landed property and Protestant 
 Establishment of that country from the Parliament 
 " Westminster. With a Parliament at College Green, many 
 "things might not have happened : the Canadas would not 
 "have been united; nor Poland been blotted out of the 
 "map of Europe. . . . Thus may Ireland present a 
 "nucleus round which may be gathered, to oppose the 
 " Parliament, such a body as that which, in the last century, 
 " opposed the Court ; and this is tJie only way in which she 
 " can work out her independence. She can do so by divisions, 
 " if no longer by reviews. And this course too will render 
 -the process as peaceful and secure as the end is certain? 
 Because legislative independence was not granted
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. in 
 
 Ireland, in the famine year ; nor in the fearful year of 
 Revolutions all over Europe, in accordance with the views 
 of the " Young England Party," therefore the Jesuit's 
 threat has been accomplished. They have caused the 
 Parliament of Westminster to destroy " the landed property 
 " and Protestant Church Establishment " of Ireland. The 
 body which had already been formed in the House of 
 Commons, in that day, which was to "oppose Parliament," 
 was the " Young England Party," with Lord George 
 Bentinck at the head of it, and Mr. D'Israeli, Mr. David 
 Urquhart, Lord John Manners, and George Smith (Lord 
 Strangford), as its soul and moving spirits. A postscript 
 to the letter mentions " a correspondence on the subject 
 " with Lord George Bentinck, shortly before his death ; " 
 and it mentions the concurrence of views and friendly 
 disposition of that noble lord. 
 
 On the 23rd of April, 1872, Archbishop Manning 
 requested an interview with me, and urged me to take up 
 the Home Rule programme, as a measure highly benefi- 
 cial to the interests of the Roman Catholic Church, and 
 promised to obtain for me a seat in Ireland. In order to 
 inform me of the nature of the movement, the Archbishop 
 gave me, on Monday, April 29, 1872, " A Plea for the Home 
 " Government of Ireland, by John George MacCartky." At 
 that interview his Grace said : " Home Rule may never 
 " be granted ; but yet it is the great guns under which we 
 " shall gain Catholic Education in Ireland." On the ist 
 of May, I wrote to Archbishop Manning : " I feel that 
 "to swim in calm water, is one thing; to be carried on by 
 " a great wave of popular tumult, is another ; . 
 " but I am anxiously reading the book your Grace was 
 " kind enough to give me, Mr. MacCarthy's, so that I 
 " may understand Home Rule." The Conservative Whips, 
 and especially Colonel Taylor, continually urged me in 
 the same direction. The latter said, on May 7 : "I wish 
 " we could get a few more Conservatives to go in for Home 
 " Rule." Mr. D'Israeli also expressed himself in the same
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 sense ; while his Secretary, on June 12, in that year, spoke 
 of the Home Rule programme as the means of making 
 " a Catholic party in the House." 
 
 On June 21, 1873, the Father Provincial of the Jesuits 
 in England wrote : " I received yesterday a letter from 
 " Ireland, which I enclose. ... I think it is very 
 " probable, from what I hear, that a good move for Home 
 " Rule is the only way to get fair play for Catholics" The 
 enclosure was a letter from the Father Provincial of the 
 Jesuits in Ireland. He said : " I should think a majority 
 "of the bishops, perhaps a large majority and a consi- 
 derable body of sound men, would think Home Rule 
 " a very good thing to get, and a thing to be tried for, 
 " if there were a good chance of getting it ... Some 
 "of the bishops how many I don't know and a num- 
 "ber of other respectable persons, look on the present 
 " agitation as tainted with Fenianism, or some such thing, 
 " considering the men who are among the foremost in the 
 " work. . . . My own leaning, as far as I have one, is 
 " in favour of Home Rule, and I think it a pity a good 
 " thing should be missed on account of a suspicious turn 
 " on the part of some of those who are looking for it." 
 Another letter, from the same Father Provincial, dated 
 June n, 1873, was more urgent and encouraging. He 
 said : " It seems to me that a man who, twenty years ago, 
 " felt it his duty to be a Tory, might, as things are now, 
 "say, There is so little difference between parties, that I 
 " feel free for either side. Again : would the adoption of 
 " Home Rule be necessarily an abandonment of Conser- 
 " vatism ? I don't see why it need be. Lastly ; is Home 
 " Rule desirable in a religious point of view ? . . . My 
 " own opinion is, that if it can be gained, it would certainly 
 " be a great step towards THE DESTRUCTION OF PROTES- 
 TANT ASCENDENCY; and, from what I have heard, I 
 "imagine that Mr. Gladstone and Lord Granmlle would 
 " not feel themselves bound to oppose it, if they saw sufficient 
 " earnestness in the cry for Home Rule" 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 113 
 
 At the very commencement of December, 1877, another 
 Jesuit priest wrote to request an interview with me, adding: 
 " I shall say nothing more to-night, as I hope to be able 
 " to say what I have to say by word of mouth." The 
 next day he came from a long distance in the country, 
 and, after some light conversation of a trifling nature, on 
 rising to leave, he turned round at the door, and said : 
 " Oh ! by the way, I wanted to tell you that I believe 
 " Gladstone will go so far in favour of Home Rule next 
 " session as to advocate that the Irish people should manage 
 " their education, as the English and Scotch people already 
 " do theirs." He then abruptly left the house. 
 
 Let us examine the announcement concerning Mr. 
 Gladstone and Lord Granville. In the debate on the 
 Habeas Corpus Suspension Act, in 1866, Mr. Gladstone 
 proclaimed the doctrine that Ireland should be legislated 
 for " according to the views of the majority of the people 
 " of that country." He did not say the majority of the 
 electors, but the majority of the people. He included the 
 overwhelming number of low, poor, ignorant Irish Roman 
 Catholics who had not, at that time, the franchise. That 
 class far outnumbered the electors. He thus denied the 
 right of the representatives of the electors to frame legis- 
 lation ; and affirmed the right of the unenfranchised 
 those very Irish who hate England most bitterly, who 
 desire to separate Ireland from England, who are imbued 
 with communistic ideas, who seek to rob the landlords of 
 their land, and are ever ready to shoot agents from behind 
 hedges or stone walls he affirmed their inherent right to 
 shape the legislation of Parliament. He did not affirm 
 that doctrine with regard to Scotland, England, or Wales. 
 Why was that ? Did the difference of religion make a 
 difference in his doctrine as to legislation ? 
 
 In December, 1876, Mr. Gladstone came somewhat near 
 the point in an article in the Contemporary Review, " On 
 " the Hellenic Factor," etc. To what views did he lead up ? 
 He said : " Why should we be alarmed at the sound of 
 
 I
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Suzerainty ? It is a phrase of infinite elasticity. . . 
 " What it implies is a practical self-management of all tb 
 "internal affairs, on which the condition of daily 
 "pends. such as police, and the judiciary, with fixed terms oi 
 "taxation especially of direct and internal taxation- 
 'with command over the levy of it. Where these points 
 ' are agreed on, there is little left to quarrel about. What 
 more than this did the Irish at that time desire ? 
 had a standing quarrel with England, did not Mr. Glad- 
 stone state the conditions on which that quarrel shoulc 
 ended, and amity restored? On November 8, 1877, Mr, 
 Gladstone applied those principles to Ireland, when he 
 spoke in Dublin : " I am profoundly convince. 
 "government, not only in the shape of municipal institu- 
 " tions but in all those other shapes in which it is known to 
 "you In history, or agreeable to the spirit of your arrange- 
 "ments, is a thing not only to be viewed with toleratu 
 "not to be viewed with misgivings, not to be viewed ev. 
 "with a cool and calculating approbation; but that 
 -fundamental to the greatness of the country and its 
 "tutions Instead of abridging the power of t 
 
 local institutions, we ought to seek to extend it ; ***** 
 is the principle which, in my opinion, lies at the root of aU 
 "sound agitation. . . . I, for my part can set no bounds 
 "to the desire that I feel to see, all through these three 
 -kingdoms, the people brought politically to learn i 
 narrower spheres, the public duties which belong to thes 
 narrower spheres ; and strive to fit themselves for t 
 "higher duties which are involved in the material worl 
 of the Government." We must bear in mind 
 Pall Mall Gazette of September 10, 1877, had reporte 
 a speech of Mr. O'Connor Power, M.P., at Manchester, on 
 "The present position of the Irish National Cause in 
 which he said : " Great forces are at work, ready to back 
 "up the Irish people in their struggle for Home Rule; 
 "one of the strongest of these being the Fenian associa- 
 " tion of New York. If the obstructive Irish members wer 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 115 
 
 " expelled from the House of Commons, such an arbitrary 
 " act would kindle an inextinguishable fire in the breast of 
 " every Irishman, and would be regarded as the call to a 
 " struggle which could only end in either the annihilation or 
 " the emancipation of the Irish people." Mr. Parnell spoke 
 in a similar vein. The Times of Oct. 29, 1877, also re- 
 ported a lecture of Mr. O'Donnell, M.P., in the League Hall, 
 Liverpool, on Sunday, the 28th, on " Ireland the Civiliser 
 " of Europe." He said : " It may well be that we may 
 "have to fight Bryan Boroim's battle over again, against 
 " foes more perfidious than those that fell before Bryan's 
 " army. But whatever may be the position, and whatever 
 " the cost, the contest has to be fought, and we are resolved 
 " to fight it. Ireland's right is no man's wrong. . . . 
 " In this matter we must be obstinate, resolute, obstructive, 
 " and even destructive (dynamite ?). We must push oppo- 
 " sition to all lengths, and all limits, unless perfect educa- 
 " tional liberty, and educational freedom and development 
 " were granted to the Irish race." Those two quotations 
 prove the character which the Home Rule movement had 
 acquired as early as 1877, before Mr. Gladstone advocated 
 it in Dublin. On the 26th of November, 1879, Mr. Glad- 
 stone unfolded his aims pretty clearly : " Let me say that, 
 " in my opinion, these two great subjects of Local Govern- 
 " ment and the Land Laws ought to occupy a foremost 
 " place in the thought of every man who desires to be a 
 " legislator. In the matter of Local Government, there 
 " may lie the solution of some National and even Imperial 
 " difficulties. It will not be in my power to enter largely 
 " upon the important question of the condition of Ireland ; 
 " but you know well how unhappily the action of Parlia- 
 " ment has been impeded and disorganized from consider- 
 " ations, no doubt conscientiously entertained, by a part 
 " of the Irish representatives, and from their desire to 
 " establish what they term Home Rule. If you ask me 
 " what I think of Home Rule, I must tell you that I will 
 " only answer you when you tell me how Home Rule is
 
 1I6 RECENT. EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " related to Local Government. I am friendly to Local 
 " Government. I am friendly to large local prerogatives. 
 " I desire-I may say I intensely desire to see Parliament 
 " relieved of some portion of its duties. ... We have 
 " got an overweighted Parliament : and if Ireland or any 
 " other portion of the country is desirous and able so to 
 "arrange its affairs as to take the local portion of some 
 " part of its transactions off Parliament, it would liberate 
 " and strengthen Parliament for Imperial concerns. 
 " that I will not only accord a reluctant consent, but give 
 "support to any such scheme. There is one limit, and one 
 " only, to the extension of Local Government ; it is this, 
 " nothing can be done by any wise statesman or right- 
 " minded Briton, to weaken or compromise the authority 
 of the Imperial Parliament. . . . But, subject to that 
 " limitation, if we can make arrangements under which 
 '< Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and portions of England can 
 " deal with questions of local and special interest to them- 
 " selves, more efficiently than Parliament now can, that, I 
 "say, will be the attainment of great national good. 
 . .1 will consent to give to Ireland no principle, 
 " nothing that is not given on equal terms to Scotland, 
 " and to different parts of the kingdom." That means the 
 destruction of the Parliament of Westminster. 
 
 No. XX. 
 
 I HAVE showed how completely Mr. Gladstone had 
 fulfilled, as far as he was concerned, the promise of the 
 Jesuit Provincial, that Mr. Gladstone and Lord Granville 
 should support Home Rule. That promise concerned, not 
 Mr. Gladstone alone, but Lord Granville also. What did 
 Lord Granville say ? On February 5, 1880, Lord Granville 
 said, addressing the Peers : " If you talk of giving to Irish- 
 " men more power to do their own local work, I entirely 
 <: agree. I believe what is wanted is a thorough reform of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 117 
 
 " the local governments of Ireland : and that we should 
 "then throw upon these reformed bodies the greatest possible 
 " amount of local duties and responsibilities. You would 
 " in this way relieve the members of the House of Com- 
 " mons from an intolerable burden that now presses upon 
 "them." 
 
 Lord Beaconsfield replied : " I was glad to hear the 
 " noble Earl use the expressions which he did with respect 
 " to Irish politics, growing out of this Irish distress. For the 
 " first time for a long while, I have tJie satisfaction of agreeing 
 " with the noble Lord in his views. . . . It is very easy 
 " to talk of the House of Commons, and of Parliament 
 " generally, being overladen with business to a great 
 " extent with Irish business and that it would be very 
 " desirable that a great portion of Irish business should be 
 "transacted in Ireland. . . . So you would go on until 
 "you had no Parliament left. We shozild find the noble 
 " Lord, in a short time, coming to this point. ... I do 
 " trust that England will understand what is the issue, at 
 " the present moment, on this subject. I wish the country 
 " to understand that it means nothing else but the dismem- 
 " berment of the United Kingdom'' 
 
 On the /th of November, 1882, Mr. Gladstone reminded 
 the House of Commons that : " I have my own opinions 
 "upon the interests of Ireland. . . . Was the hon. 
 " member in jest, when he said : Why do you not take 
 " advantage of this opportunity to advance the power of 
 " local self-government in Ireland ? Well, sir, I tell the 
 " hon. gentleman that there is not a subject which I could 
 " name, on which I personally feel a more profound anxiety, 
 " than on the local self-government of Ireland, and local 
 " self-government upon a liberal and effective basis." Lest 
 any remarks of mine should appear partial and prejudiced, 
 let us seek the judgment of an impartial critic nay, one 
 who wrote in the interests of the Government. The Times, 
 of November 9, said : " Lord Randolph Churchill has lately 
 " held out the hand of fellowship to the followers of Mr.
 
 ii8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 11 Parnell ; and perhaps Mr. Gladstone's vague language 
 "yesterday may be meant to show that the Irish would be 
 "foolish to carry their grievances and their votes to a party 
 " which, being in opposition, can have nothing substantial 
 " to give. The Prime Minister's argument, addressed to 
 " the Irish members, was that when the cloture is in force, 
 " public business will be rapidly despatched, and that, 
 " among the measures the Government have at heart, there 
 "is none more important than local self-government in 
 " Ireland on a liberal and effective basis." The Standard 
 affirmed that, respecting Home Rule, " the Prime Minister 
 " has voluntarily contracted obligations towards the Irish 
 " Separatists, which they may call upon him, at any moment, 
 " to discharge." The Romanist and National Freeman's 
 Journal declared that " this is not the first time on which 
 " Mr. Gladstone has indicated that the question of Home 
 " Rule was in his thoughts ; but he has never yet declared 
 " so clearly and distinctly his opinion of its necessity, or the 
 " extent to which it should be conceded, as he did yester- 
 " day. The significance of that utterance can scarcely be 
 "exaggerated. . . . The United Kingdom will recognise 
 " that the cause of Home Rule in Ireland has been dis- 
 tinctly advanced, and brought more clearly into the 
 "domain of practical politics, by Mr. Gladstone's speech." 
 At the beginning of 1883 the scheme had begun to flag. 
 But Dr. Croke, Popish Archbishop of Cashel, came to the 
 rescue, by a letter in the Times of February 10, in which 
 he said : " I had begun to hope that we had seen the last 
 " of Irish famines, but I am more than ever thoroughly 
 " convinced that, until we get, into our own hands, the 
 " management of our own affairs, and shake off the yoke 
 "of the bloated and ruthless oligarchy that continues to 
 " oppress us, we can never expect to enjoy the blessings 
 " of social peace, or the plenty that is known to prevail 
 "among every other free-born people." At the same time, 
 Mr. Gladstone, who was in the south of France, took care 
 to proclaim anew that he was in favour of Home Rule, and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 119 
 
 to telegraph the information all over the world. That 
 telegraphic communication was of course never contradicted 
 nor even corrected. It was first published on February 10, 
 in Mr. Gladstone's organ, the Daily News, Mr. Gladstone 
 said to Mr. Clemenceau, "with intense earnestness," no 
 third person apparently being present "The curse of 
 " Ireland has been centralisation. What I hope and desire 
 " what I labour for, and have above all things at heart, 
 "is to decentralise administrative authority there. We 
 "have disestablished the Church; we have relieved the 
 " tenant of many grievances ; we are now trying to produce 
 " a state of things, which will make the humblest Irishman 
 " realise that he is a governing agent, and that the govern- 
 " ment is to be carried on for him, and by him." The reporter, 
 we are told, related " exactly what happened ; " and thus 
 we learn that, as the curse of Ireland in the past has been 
 centralisation, so, in the future, autonomy or Home Rule 
 was to be its blessing. Mr. Gladstone was " intensely 
 " earnest " about that, and he had it " above all things at 
 " heart." It was remarked that Lord Hartington said, about 
 this time, at Bacup : " It is a libel upon the Irish Govern- 
 " ment to say, as has been said lately by a distinguished 
 " man Mr. Herbert Gladstone that the Government of 
 " Ireland is the least national, and the most centralised in 
 " the world. ... It would be madness, in my opinion, 
 "to volunteer to give to Ireland more extended self- 
 " government, unless we can receive from the representa- 
 " tives of the Irish people some assurance that this boon 
 " would not be misused for the purposes of agitation, and 
 "for the purpose of weakening the authority and pow^r 
 "of the Government." Mr. Herbert Gladstone, son of the 
 Premier, and a Lord of the Treasury, had just delivered 
 not an impromptu and ill-considered speech but a 
 written " lecture," to his constituents at Leeds, on February 
 12. It was certainly the most outspoken declaration in 
 favour of Home Rule that had ever been delivered by a 
 Minister of the Crown. There were, he thought, strong
 
 120 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 a priori arguments for the adoption of Home Rule; and 
 he did not see that the establishment of a Parliament in 
 Dublin would endanger the Queen's authority in Ireland. 
 To this he attached the utmost importance : that the Irish 
 people should, before long, have the command of the 
 police, and, it appears, the control of a local army also. 
 
 On February 27, 1880, indeed, Mr. Gladstone had made 
 a declaration or manifesto at Marylebone, in which he 
 proclaimed that : " the more they could detach subordinate 
 " functions from Parliament, and give satisfaction, not only 
 " to Ireland, but to every portion of the United Kingdom, 
 " so much the better." He then added in a vein of irony : 
 " As to Home Rule, this guilty thing ! so guilty that you 
 " must not touch it, nor even smell it ! the thing which is 
 " to dismember the empire ! for that is what the Tories now 
 " define Home Rule to be, are there no Home Rulers on 
 " the Tory benches ? Is not Mr. King-Harman a Home 
 " Ruler ? and has he not, in the full exuberance of his 
 "views, been appointed by the Prime Minister, Lord 
 " Beaconsfield, to be Lord Lieutenant of the County of 
 ' Roscommon, in order there to practise the dismember- 
 " ment of the Empire ? " I shall have more to say to Mr. 
 King-Harman. At present let us return to the year 1874, 
 and see how the elections were worked, and by what 
 power. 
 
 On the 1 2th of January, 1874, twelve days before the 
 dissolution was suddenly proclaimed, and when no one 
 had any suspicion of the stir that was in store for them, a 
 Jesuit rector wrote to me : " If you want a seat in the next 
 " House, why not go in for Home Rule, pure and simple. 
 I conceive Home Rule may be presented in a 
 " form which the most conservative might accept. And 
 " why should you not accept it ? In the main, Home Rule 
 "ought to mean : Justice to Catholic Ireland" On the 3ist 
 of January, he wrote: "The Platform: Home Rule, Catholic 
 " Education, Amnesty (of the Fenian prisoners), I think you 
 " may fairly commit yourself to." 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 121 
 
 After the elections, the Fenian element was by far the 
 strongest section of the new Irish party. The simply 
 Roman Catholic element was weak, puerile, and without 
 energy. It was a mere shadow. Moreover, the two great 
 parties of the state were not evenly balanced, as had been 
 hoped and expected. Mr. D'Israeli had returned with an 
 overwhelming majority. A letter from one of the wire- 
 pullers in Ireland, dated January 22, 1875, after expressing 
 disappointment at the result, said : " the attitude at present 
 "must be a waiting one. But whenever parties shall be 
 " more evenly balanced, and that day may not be very re- 
 " mote, t/ie fate 0f Governments will depend on the Irish 
 " Catholic vote'' Later in the year, November 19, a well- 
 informed politician in England, wrote in these terms : " In 
 " Ireland, the priests seem to be labouring all they can to 
 " mix with the crowd, in order to lead them." The reply 
 from Ireland, dated November 22, admitted this statement 
 of the case : " I agree with you in your estimate of the 
 " Leaders of the Home Rule party. But I look forward 
 "confidently to a change for the better. . . . You 
 " have rightly understood the conduct of the priests. . . . 
 " It is a necessity for an Irish Parliamentary Representative 
 " to adopt the same course. . . . Butt's Land Bill is, in 
 "truth, a most revolutionary measure, and some of its 
 "provisions would lead to confiscation. But the Home 
 " Rule member who would vote against it, would be held 
 "to a severe reckoning." On January 15, 1877, the same 
 gentleman wrote: "The Catholic bishops and clergy are 
 " daily falling into the Home Rule movement. They want 
 " to have a united Irish party, not so much for Home Rule 
 "as for education, and other purposes. . . . Notwith- 
 " standing the questionable character of some of the Home 
 " Rulers, if ecclesiastical support be given unanimously 
 "and heartily, the Irish vote must make itself felt." He 
 then mentioned having been shown letters from Colonel 
 Taylor and Sir Michael Hicks-Beach (the Irish Secretary) 
 to Colonel King-Harman, promising him the support of the
 
 122 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Conservative party, if he would stand as both a Home Ruler 
 and a supporter of the Conservative Government. This 
 was no news to me ; for both Mr. Butt, and Colonel King- 
 Harman himself, had told me the same. In fact, Colonel 
 Taylor wanted to lead Colonel King-Harman up to the 
 table to be sworn, in company with Mr. Butt, " so as to 
 " signify a closer union of the two parties." But, on Mr. 
 Butt refusing, Colonel Taylor and a son of the Duke of 
 Abercorn, the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, did so. A little 
 later, Major Myles O'Reilly, a Home Rule member, re- 
 ceived from Mr. D'Israeli the post of Inspector of Educa- 
 tion, with a salary of 1,200 a year. A similar post was 
 offered to another Home Rule member. Six weeks 
 before Mr. D'Israeli went out, in 1880, Mr. George Morris, 
 another Home Rule member, was appointed to the Irish 
 Local Government Board. He was brother to a Liberal 
 Home Rule member whom Mr. D'Israeli had already 
 made a judge. 
 
 NO. XXI. 
 
 BEFORE the middle of January, 1880, the Aurora, the 
 new organ of the Pope (who was supposed to be rising, 
 like a Sun of Righteousness, in the East), presented the 
 world with the view of the Vatican regarding Ireland ; 
 and with revelations which might influence persons of 
 weight in England. To hear its lucubrations now, is like 
 listening to a tocsin of warning. It tells of measures 
 which were then expected of the Government of England, 
 whether directed by a D'Israeli or a Gladstone measures 
 which have, alas ! been successfully thrust on the Parlia- 
 ment, by the adroitness of the two leaders, and the 
 mystification caused by these political opponents coales- 
 cing in their action. The first number of the Aurora 
 said : " Although it appears that the news of a rebellion 
 in " Ireland is unfounded, it is, at any rate, certain that
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 123 
 
 "England is beginning to experience the difficulties and 
 " dangers, or at least the inconveniences of the principles 
 " the late Lord Palmerston's Government potentially con- 
 "tributed to diffuse through Europe. Ireland has, for a 
 " long time, been a country agitated by many passions, for 
 "the reason that the most sacred rights of the ancient 
 " Irish inhabitants were violated by Anglican intolerance 
 " and rigid laws, and that the oppression of the Catholics 
 "had the effect of causing them to seek to obtain justice 
 "through secret associations. To-day the injustice has, 
 " in great part, been redressed ; but much remains to be 
 " done for the poor Irish, who have been despoiled of t/ieir 
 "land. . . . Ireland, therefore, asks for a Parliament of 
 "her own, as she had in times past ; and maintains that it 
 " is neither just nor reasonable that the laws of Ireland 
 "should be made in London, instead of in Dublin. . . . 
 " What is more, the Irish cannot forget that tJie land they 
 "now see in the possession of others, was taken, by force, from 
 " their ancestors, who legitimately owned it. The flames 
 " are spreading, inasmuch as other persons, who care less 
 "for Ireland than for the triumph of Revolutionary and 
 " Radical principles, fan them. But these flames must, one 
 " day or another, break out, and may extend to edifices more 
 "secure. The present condition of Ireland is the result, 
 " not only of the conquest, but of the wars of religion, and 
 " the wars of legitimacy. To remedy entirely this condition 
 " is impossible. But it is necessary to prepare, or to allow 
 " liberty of legally forming, a more equitable and a more 
 " tolerable state of things for the people who are descended 
 "from the ancient proprietors. This, many men of sense 
 "believe, cannot be obtained by better means than a 
 "Parliament of her own for Ireland. And, perhaps, this 
 "will be the best remedy, if that Parliament which, it 
 " seems, the English now incline towards granting shall 
 "be composed of upright and religious men." The Voce 
 della Verita, the Jesuit organ, simultaneously published an 
 article on the same subject, and in the same sense. It
 
 I2 4 RECENT EVENTS', AND A 
 
 said: "The present agitation in Ireland, in our opinion, is 
 "nothing more than the continuation of the great move- 
 " ment initiated by O'Connell ; and it will have a happy 
 " issue if the revolutionary passions, falsifying its scope, do 
 "not convert it into a rebellion into an episode of the 
 " Great Revolution, which, for nearly a century, has con- 
 " vulsed the nation, and the result of which has been the 
 " confiscation of their most sacred rights in favour of a 
 " rival sect, which tyrannises over them. The patience of 
 " the Irish, their patriotism, their respect for the law, and, 
 "above all, for the Catholic religion, which commands 
 " obedience to legitimate powers, and which, in return for 
 " this obedience, promises every good thing ; the sense of 
 "the English, their love of true liberty, the now extinct 
 "religious hatreds, and finally the fulness of the times, 
 "and the unanimous consent of all real Liberals in that 
 "country, give us ground for hoping that 1880 will close 
 "the era of the agitations commenced in 1828 (for Catholic 
 " emancipation). Yes, the Irish will acquire complete liberty, 
 "and will break the chains which still bind them to the 
 " servitude of the soil, remaining faithful to their religious 
 " traditions" 
 
 The general election of 1880 was very near at har 
 Those who knew the recondite principle of affairs, foresaw 
 that Mr. Gladstone would resume power. They knew that 
 he would cut off the remaining branch of the " Upas-tree of 
 " Protestant ascendency? and spoliate the Irish landlords, 
 because they were Protestants, to the benefit of the Irish 
 farmers, because they were Romanists. That measure 
 the Vatican had commanded ; and also the fostering of 
 the Home Rule bantling, which had been conceived and 
 brought forth by the Conservative party, and decreed to 
 subsist until Ireland should have her own Parliament, 
 elected by the Romanist descendants of the ancient 
 Romanist owners of the soil. 
 
 What ! Does any one doubt that it was a Conservative 
 bantling and a D'Israelian conception? Turn then, and 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 125 
 
 enter the "League Hall" at Liverpool, on February 3, 1880. 
 Hear the eloquent barrister and Home Rule member of 
 Parliament, the late A. M. Sullivan. He said : "We dis- 
 " cover in those officials Col. Taylor, Sir M. Hicks-Beach, 
 " etc., the very Conservative officials who led us into the 
 " Home Rule movement. Now, it is very well known, the 
 " Home Rule movement was, and is, in a certain measure, a 
 " compromise between us, the Irish Nationalists, and certain 
 " Conservative politicians, who, in the year 1870, from the 
 " Conservative camp, came to us Nationalists with an in- 
 " vitation to enter upon this Home Rule movement. In- 
 " fluential agents and representatives of the Conservative 
 " party, some of them, to my knowledge, in constant com- 
 " munication with the party managers in London, pressed 
 " upon us in Ireland to enter on the Home Rule movement. 
 " I tell Lord Sandon, as a chief of the Conservative party, 
 " much as he pretends now to denounce Home Rule, that 
 " the Conservative party supplied the money that fought 
 " some of the earliest Home Rule election contests in 
 " Ireland, (and this, Loyal Irishmen of the green placard 
 " may rejoice to know) ; further, that the contest of the only 
 " open and avowed Fenian candidate in Ireland, Mr. O 1 Dono- 
 " van Rossa, for Tipperary, was fought on money supplied 
 "by the Conservative party. I will give the name of the 
 " Conservative agent who advanced the funds. Further, I 
 " state that the members of the Conservative party who 
 " were most prominently active, in election matters, in iden- 
 " tifying themselves with us Home Rulers and Nationalists, 
 " on a certain day were offered honours and appointments 
 " by the men who now compose Her Majesty's Govern- 
 "ment." 1 
 
 Not content with throwing down the gauntlet at Liver- 
 pool, Mr. Sullivan further challenged contradiction, and 
 courted an action for libel, if false, by writing a letter 
 to the Daily Telegraph (February 4). In that letter he 
 asserted point blank, and said he was prepared to prove, 
 1 i.e. Lord Beaconsfield's Government.
 
 12 6 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 that : " TJie whole Home Rule agitation has been got up, and 
 11 kept up by tJte influence and money of Conservative leaders 
 "and agents; that the money was supplied by Conservatives, 
 " not only to fight the Home Rule battle in many Irish con- 
 " stituencies ; but that tJie only open and avowed FENIAN 
 "candidature in Ireland was supported by members of the 
 " Conservative party" Mr. Sullivan was no obscure or con- 
 temptible individual. He was a member of Parliament of 
 considerable influence, and a barrister of great acumen. 
 His assertions could not be passed by with mycterismus or 
 a sniff. He had more than once asserted that Home Rule 
 was a scheme of Conservative origin ; that it had been 
 started by the leaders of the Conservative party : that its 
 battles were fought by Conservative gold ; that the candi- 
 dature of the Fenian, O'Donovan Rossa, was supported by 
 the influence of the Conservative party ; and further, that a 
 number of Home Rulers were offered honours and rewards 
 by the Conservative Premier. Moreover, Mr. Sullivan 
 asserted that he and other Home Rulers were "led to 
 "believe" that Mr. D'Israeli would establish a "domestic 
 " Legislature " in Ireland. 
 
 On February 6, Mr. Sullivan, not having received any 
 reply, reiterated his challenge in the columns of the Times. 
 He said ; " Of the funds expended in the Home Rule 
 " propaganda, between 1869 and 1872, in election contests 
 "and otherwise, at least one-half, and more probably 
 " three-fourths, as I shall show, were found by our Con- 
 "servative section." The Conservatives declared they 
 "would throw themselves heartily into a movement for 
 "the restoration to Ireland of a domestic Parliament, 
 " supreme as to domestic affairs. For a long time the bulk 
 " of the Irish Catholics who were either Liberals, Repealers, 
 " or Nationalists, viewed those utterances with mistrust and 
 "suspicion; and those of us who, like myself, urged a 
 " frank and cordial reception of them, were denounced as 
 agents and dupes of the Tories. See the pages of the 
 " Dublin Evening Post, Whig organ, and the Irish Times, 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 127 
 
 "Conservative organ, throughout 1870 to 1873. At length 
 "... the Conservative gentlemen issued an invitation 
 "to some fifty or sixty prominent and influential men 
 ". . . to hold a conference on the subject. . . . 
 " Those gentlemen were, in social position and public life, 
 " among the highest and foremost, the most active and 
 " influential, of the Conservative party in Ireland. . . 
 "Yet Lord Sandon, Sir W. Dyke, and Colonel Taylor 
 " declare that there is not a shadow of foundation for the 
 " statement that it was upon an invitation proceeding from 
 "the Conservative camp that the Irish Nationalists com- 
 " menced this Home Rule Movement." Then, after giving 
 many details, he repeated his assertion " that two Fenian 
 " candidatures, that of O'Donovan Rossa and that of C. 
 "J. Kickham, were supported with Conservative money; 
 "and that the men who most largely sacrificed money, 
 " time, and exertion in establishing and advancing the 
 " Home Rule Movement, were, before our eyes, singled 
 " out for marks of favour by the leaders and chiefs of the 
 " Conservative party ; and yet Lord Sandon declares 
 "boldly that there is not a shadow of foundation for the 
 " statement." 
 
 That awkward revelation was hard to meet ; harder 
 still to explain away. Yet why should it have been awk- 
 ward ? If Home Rule was, what we were persuaded, an 
 honest means of redressing the wrongs of Ireland, and 
 staving off or preventing a Revolution, and bloodshed 
 and slaughter, which were imminent (as Mr. D' Israeli 
 averred over and over again to me, when he urged and 
 entreated, persuaded and promised, for two years, and got 
 me to declare for Home Rule), then why be ashamed of 
 it ? Why not have avowed it ? Perhaps consciousness of 
 deception made him ashamed. Was that so ? The awk- 
 wardness might have been due entirely to the tortuous 
 conduct of Mr. DTsraeli. Certainly, sinuosity was an 
 essential element in his character. He secretly fostered 
 Home Rule, aided Fenians, and pleased the Romanists.
 
 I28 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Openly he denounced the Home Rulers as traitors to 
 their Queen and country, and secured the support c 
 testants Therefore was his obedient henchman, Colonel 
 Taylor, compelled to give, to this true story, a direct 
 tele-raphic denial. An Irish politician of considerabl 
 eminence, and intimately acquainted with all the sinuosil 
 of Irish politics, wrote to me on Feb. 9, 1880: 
 " read Sullivan's speech and letter, but did not see Colonel 
 Taylor's telegram in denial. He (Taylor) may not have 
 "taken an active step about Home Rule; but to a cer- 
 " tainty, he connived at the support given to it by his 
 friends here (in Ireland). The Conservatives first set the 
 movement on foot. . . . They are a sad lot, taking 
 "them all round." A sad lot, indeed! But what was 
 the occasion of all this pother? Lord Ramsay, no* 
 Lord Dalhousie, and a member of the late Government, 
 was a candidate for Liverpool in Mr. Gladstone's interesl 
 He received orders from head-quarters, not directly froi 
 Mr Gladstone; but directly, by telegram, from Lord 
 Hartincrton, to take the Home Rule pledge. In sum, a 
 Jesuit had invented Home Rule ; Mr. Disraeli had push 
 it on; and then, when it became necessary for Mr. 
 DTsraeli to drop it, Mr. Gladstone took up the running, 
 and kept the Home Rule game alive. 
 
 Colonel King-Harman is an excellent gentleman, a 
 prominent Conservative member. In his election address, 
 of January, 1877, he said : " I raised the cry of Horn 
 " Rule at a time when no other man in Ireland had rai 
 "it In Longford (election) and in Dublin (election) 
 " fought for it. ... Home Rule involves every other 
 " point in the programme, as, if we had Home Rule, 
 "everything else would follow." When Colonel King- 
 Harman entered the House of Commons, what happened? 
 Of course we should suppose that he was repudiated 
 by Lord Beaconsfield, and shunned by the Conservatr 
 leaders Not at all. At least, then, he was twitted with 
 his complicity with Home Rule ? Quite the contrary ; 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 129 
 
 Colonel Taylor, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, 
 and Lord Hamilton, the son of the Lord Lieutenant of 
 Ireland, introduced him to the House, and led him up to 
 the table, amid Conservative cheers, to subscribe the oath. 
 Very soon afterwards (April 24, 1877), he was selected to 
 second Mr. Shaw's Home Rule motion ; and reminded the 
 House that " tlie first body of men who spoke up for Home 
 " Rule were principally Protestant Conservative gentlemen:' 
 On October 7, 1878, he was rewarded by Mr. Disraeli 
 with the Lord Lieutenancy of the County Roscommon. 
 
 On February 11, 1880, Mr. Sullivan wrote another letter 
 to the Times :" It is assuredly remarkable that, serious 
 " as were my statements, and publicly and explicitly as I 
 gave the names of living men, and dates, circumstances 
 " and particulars, not a solitary instance of refutation has 
 " up to this hour appeared. ... I have, since Satur- 
 day last, received from Ireland such a mass of documents 
 that I must abandon my original intention of 
 " including them in a letter to the Times, and now propose 
 "publishing them as a pamphlet." Ah ! Sullivan, I knew 
 you well. You were a poor man, and you rose from the 
 humblest station, by your brilliant talents alone. You 
 were always poor, but you were honest ; and I doubt 
 not that you refused the bribe of thousands sterling which 
 was certain to have been made as soon as the Conser- 
 vative leaders learned your intention of publishing. But 
 you sprang suddenly into considerable practice at the 
 bar, and you had not the time, or you lost the inclination, 
 of giving to the world your pamphlet. 
 
 The Mtmoriale Diplomatique* paper which is con- 
 nected with most of the Cabinets of Europe, and which 
 somehow obtains secret information, which proves correct- 
 fully corroborated Mr. Sullivan. On February 4, 1880 it 
 said : " It was the Conservatives who, in 1870, paid 
 and pushed on the elections of Home Rule candidates. 
 It would be very easy for me personally to furnish very 
 " curious proofs of the alliance between the Tories and 
 
 K
 
 , 3 o RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Home Rulers. It is, however, just to admit that as soon 
 " as Mr. D'Israeli acceded to power, he threw over and 
 " forgot his former associates, and abandoned them to the 
 "fury of his friends." A previous number of the same 
 journal (April 19, 1879). wrote concerning me: "He was 
 most unworthily deceived by Mr. D'Israeli, who urged 1 
 "and almost forced him to join the Home Rulers, and 
 " then, without any sense of shame, abandoned him ; be- 
 " cause Mr. D'Israeli did not find him to be the pliable 
 " and docile tool which he had supposed." 
 
 It is very well known that the Home Rule leader, Mr. 
 Butt, was in constant communication with Mr. D'Israeli 
 Cabinet The Irish University Bill, which Lord Cairns 
 introduced in 1879, had been drafted by Mr. Butt, ii 
 Dublin and in communication with the Irish 
 Catholic prelates, only a few months before his < 
 Now Mr. Butt is gone. Mr. D'Israeli is gone. 
 Rule is gone, leaving Fenianism in its place. 1 
 Taylor too has gone. And now, what doth it profi 
 Their memory is already tarnished ; because their work< 
 have followed them. An honest and fearless policy migh 
 not have brought the emoluments of office, and 
 pleasant sense of power, and the sweet breath of ignorant 
 adulation ; but it would have caused their memories 
 rise up and be honoured, long after they themselves hac 
 been laid to rest; it would have brought them a far 
 greater gain in Grace and Light, which never pass away, 
 but increase unto the perfect day. On one occasion, I 
 expostulated with a statesman at the lies which, to my 
 knowledge, were uttered day by day in the House, and 
 out of it. I expressed my indignation at what I regard 
 as a shameful evil. To my surprise, he answered quietly : 
 " Ah ! it is quite impossible to carry on the Governme: 
 without it." " Then," said I, " I would prefer not to return 
 "to office. But it seems that the devil, for once, was 
 
 
 Written July 23, 1885.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. i 3 r 
 
 " caught telling a truth, when he said, of the kingdoms of 
 " the world and the glory of them, that they were his to 
 " give away to whom he would." 
 
 No. XXII. 
 
 BEFORE I describe the Irish party, ft is necessary to say 
 something of the modus operandi of the political Jesuits. 
 I have been with a Jesuit when his letters arrived. There 
 were reports, not only from the great towns in Great 
 Britain, but also from Turkey, Syria, Circassia, and even 
 from Australia, New Zealand, India, and the United 
 States. He told me frequently that his followers obey 
 him without a word or question ; and that if he should 
 order any one to stab himself with that dagger, he would 
 do so ; or if he should order him to jump off the top of 
 the house, he would jump without questioning. A few 
 years before the time that I learned this, there had been 
 the Sonderbund war, in which Lord Palmerston, our last 
 Protestant Minister, supported the Federal Government, 
 against the Jesuits or Ultramontane party, who upheld 
 the Swiss Cantonal rights (Home Rule). By creating 
 delays, Lord Palmerston managed to prevent the inter- 
 ference of France and Austria, until the Radicals had 
 attained success. On November 20, 1847, Lord Palmer- 
 ston wrote to Lord Ponsonby, requiring " that the founda- 
 tion of the arrangements should be, that the Jesuits 
 "should be removed from the whole of the territory of 
 " the Swiss Confederation ; . . . and that unless they 
 " leave Switzerland entirely, there will be no chance of 
 " peace in that country." In a very few years, that centre 
 of restless intrigue was transferred to this country, which 
 is now crowded with Jesuits. For years the English 
 people have been feeling the weight of their hand, with- 
 out knowing that it is theirs, and without energy to cast 
 off the incubus.
 
 At the same time, I learned that the Jesuits had placed 
 writers, in their interest, on the staff of writers, or else on 
 the management, of nearly every newspaper, ex 
 Times (which they could not compass in Delane's t 
 and that they were in the practice of sending i 
 or "Leaders," gratuitously, to nearly every periodical, fc 
 publication. Not one of those writers was, of course, ever 
 so incautious as to "show his hand "; nor did the articles 
 go so far as to betray the source from whence they emana- 
 ted In 1843 or 1844, I remember reading an article 
 the Times itself, which struck me very much, 
 if I remember, with the words "Francis Borgia. Years 
 afterwards, a Jesuit acknowledged to me that he 
 written the article, and was very soon afterwards t 
 off from the Times staff for it. He was a wonde 
 writer- but incautiously he went too fast. The Jesi 
 are usually content to lead the public mind by 
 steps. To say more, may betray the origin, 
 moreover, give a shock to a few public ^ men here and 
 there and so lead to a revulsion of feeling, 
 steps long continued-the very gradual, but persistent 
 advance, is sure to attain its end. Why ? because nearly 
 every man is content with looking at the events of the 
 day, and discussing them, and then laying them aside 
 thinking no more about them. Not one man in a hun 
 thousand tabulates, and watches \hzprogress of events anc 
 detects the little steps, and observes the direction in which 
 they tend. It is a long and laborious process ; 
 repays in the end. It is the exact converse of the 
 steps in advance. 
 
 Of course the Jesuit writers, on the various papei 
 periodicals, take every side in politics. It matters not 
 whence the public are led, so long as they are ultimately 
 led to the desired point. Since the great upheaving 
 1789 the efforts of the Jesuits have been persistently 
 directed to a recovery of their former ascendency ovei 
 states and rulers. Before the Revolution they msn 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. '33 
 
 themselves into Courts, and gained influence directly over 
 princes and statesmen. Since 1789, power has been at- 
 Sched to electoral majorities (that is, "the people ); 
 nd to newspapers (that is, "the press"); and to money 
 (that is "financial power"). The whole effort of the 
 Jesuits has, therefore, been directed to manipulating these 
 three sources of influence ; and, of late years, Mr. D Israeli 
 assisted them enormously in gaining financial power, a 
 a Jesuit explained to me. The Cote, a Ruu news- 
 paper, had found it out just before, and published it while 
 Mr Disraeli was Prime Minister, and openly dared him to 
 brin- an action for libel ; and when an apology was asked 
 f the Russian Government, it refused. As to the people 
 the Jesuits have been untiring in their efforts in favour c 
 candidates who would benefit them, or at least would not 
 be likely to injure their Society. Faute de mieux, they 
 give all their support to those plastic individuals who have 
 no ideas of their own, and can either be led or driven in 
 any direction, without knowing or heeding whither 
 
 are tending. , 
 
 After the elections, all the new members are eagerly 
 watched ; and what they say and do and .think is tabu 
 lated ; and preliminary canters are held in the House, 
 betre any Jrious step is attempted; and so the Whips 
 can tell you before every division, exactly who will vote c 
 
 ach side especially as they have ahold on many members 
 by knowVg'the things they have done (which have -an* 
 "mitted" them), and being aware of the things they want 
 (which amounts to bribing them). Illicfc means are also 
 employed, in the restless endeavour to gam influence and 
 power At one time a heavy bill was run up, for trivialities 
 y a solicitor, against a member who had not the means of 
 paying it ; and then payment was deferred as long as^ 
 voted and acted in the way he was bid. At another time 
 when a young member was gambling for high stakes a 
 rap was laid to induce him to act fraud uently with his 
 cards. At another time, a young member for one of the
 
 , 34 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Midland Counties was asked to call and witness a docu- 
 ment for an old widowed lady. He went and found, in- 
 stead, a Lais or Aspasia in complete deshabille, who allured 
 him, by softest charms and wiles which proved, however, 
 not 'to be irresistible into the net which had been pre- 
 pared to entangle him. A similar, but worse, attempt was 
 made at a Turkish bath in 1860 ; and was also evaded. 
 
 If the trap had been successful, if the power had once 
 been obtained, and the member had " committed himself," 
 then that power would have speedily been exercised, 
 member of Parliament would have been bidden to do some 
 discreditable political act to do some "dirty work," as a 
 ' party hack." Under threat of exposure, he would have 
 been compelled to do it ; and then he would have been 
 anxious that this act too should not be published, 
 a second chain and fetter would have been riveted to bind 
 him. Presently, a third would have been forged, still 
 stronger and more discreditable than the others ; and so, 
 on, until he had given up all hopes of escape, and had 
 become submissive, and resigned himself, without question- 
 ing, to do all the bidding of his taskmasters. 
 on & c'e, he would have found his reward in " getting on." 
 speeches would have been cheered to the echo, and reported 
 in leaded type. He would have been spoken of as " the 
 " future leader," perhaps, and have risen rapidly to emolu- 
 ments, and honours, and offices, and distinction, 
 where he thenceforward would smell the sweet incense 
 of adulation ; and his name would appear in newspaper 
 articles, which are the wholesale stock whence conversa- 
 tions are retailed ; and his sayings and doings would be 
 chronicled by all the provincial newspapers throughout the 
 kingdom. A very old Irish member said to me, in the 
 spring of 1859 : " If you want to get on in the House, the 
 " sooner you get rid of your conscience the better." And 
 an old Jesuit, not a year later, warned me in these words : 
 " England knows not her greatest men ; " meaning that 
 honest men do not rise to fame. Because he who shrinks 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 135 
 
 the nrst evil act, - 
 
 with the willow withes of I >ebfc *, bu dily 
 
 declares boldly for f^om and a go ^ Sneers 
 
 finds that his lot is to go d< vn bes 
 
 and innuendoes are spread about msoc^y ^ c 
 
 are invented and repe. eo^ d ; s are l.ke 
 
 "form," said a Jesuit to me P"t y s main . 
 
 barbed arrows, which fly and ltet No ^ nours fall 
 tain a chilling silence about such .,. w ^ ^ 
 
 to his lot No chanc , ar eto Tn fluence and fame is 
 
 is 
 
 y shru "orance or sneer of contem pt ^ 
 I have been led into this some what .1 ng F 
 
 took 
 
 t 
 
 party. The elecUons too pa ^ 
 
 March 13, 1874, Mr. P. ] ^ym Conference , its re- 
 
 .. for granted that the one object of ^^ Q( 
 
 solutions, its - ; ;n .""expenses, was to lay the 
 -two guineas for pteU nary v as leader, and 
 
 .. groundwork for a dictatorslupwit ^^ 
 
 "Henry as supplemental leader, managers, 
 
 .. O'Sullivan, and one or two mor as supp an 
 
 , an d wire-pullers. These persons , U Mttt ^ ^
 
 136 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " and commit them to such hands as they please ; and they 
 " will seek to prevent an independent member from ini- 
 " tiating anything without their consent. The whole thing 
 " is a conspiracy against the personal freedom of members, 
 " and consequently against the rights of constituencies and 
 " the liberties of the people. . . . I do not consider, 
 " for example, that a party composed of Protestants and 
 " Catholics has a right, as a party, to take any action on 
 " purely Catholic questions \ and education may be so 
 " regarded. The danger is that the Irish representation 
 " may be degraded, by allowing its movements to be re- 
 " gulated by a clique, as is practically the case with the 
 " Home Rule League." 
 
 It was, indeed, intended from the very first, that Mr. 
 Butt should be absolute ruler over the Irish party ; and 
 that Mr. Butt should be always in close communication 
 with Mr. D'Israeli. Yet he held in his hand all the strings 
 of the Fenian conspiracy, ever since the time that he advo- 
 cated their cause with so much ability. As leader of the 
 Irish party, he was the Lieutenant-General under Mr. 
 D'Israeli ; he could arrange plans in his Freemason's Lodge 
 in Dublin, and advise the Fenians in all their schemes. 
 What an exceptional man for a leader under Mr. D'ls- 
 raeli's direction ! What a great addition to Mr. D'Israeli's 
 strength t 
 
 (From the English Churchman July ^oth, 1885.) 
 
 The late Rev. Dr. Tresham Gregg said truly many years ago, in 
 reference to the laying aside of Protestant principles, " The Conser- 
 "vative party have thrown away the only flag that ever led it to 
 " victory." 
 
 I have read many Conservative speeches and election addresses, 
 and, except in one instance, and that occurred in Liverpool, I entirely 
 failed to see any anti-ritualistic or, what is virtually the same, anti- 
 Romish feeling expressed. Since the reign of James II., which 
 commenced in 1685, no statesman has done so much for Popery as 
 Mr. Gladstone has done. Now that he has gone out of office, our party 
 can point out all the harm he has done in foreign politics, war, finance, 
 etc., but are like dumb dogs as to his greatest fault. What a chance 
 the appointment of Mr. Linklater gives to raise an anti-Gladstone cry 
 on Protestant grounds. True ; but Lord Salisbury cannot unfurl the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 137 
 
 forgotten flag. He has given office to Lord Bury, a pervert ; and you, 
 Mr. Editor, have very properly pointed out several other perverts in 
 office ; and, what is worse, these perverts are connected with the 
 administration of both the Army and Navy. Here is 1685 over again. 
 Although I have invariably voted for Conservative candidates, I can- 
 not feel very enthusiastic in favour of Salisbury or Churchill. I have 
 refused all tickets for Conservative meetings since Lord Salisbury 
 took the lead. I cannot forget that he united with Gladstone to 
 oppose the Religious Worship Bill. Randolph Churchill insulted the 
 Protestant clergy of the West of Ireland by asking them to pledge 
 themselves not to proselyte in the distribution of relief, while asking 
 no such pledge from the priests ! It is only a few months since, that 
 he argued in favour of "Catholic" education in Ireland. I should 
 like to see a grand National Protestant movement on the lines of 
 1688. This cannot, under present circumstances, be successful all 
 at once. There is not sufficient Protestant feeling in the country to 
 warrant it. The people have been going mad after " church restora- 
 " tion " and " harvest festivals," and require a good deal of awakening 
 to the danger they are in. Monmouth's rebellion was not popular in 
 1685, but William was enthusiastically received by all classes in 1688. 
 So, perhaps, in 1888 Protestantism may awake from its slumber of 
 1885. 
 
 G. W. M, 
 LIVERPOOL, July 27th, 1885.
 
 123 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. XXIII. 
 
 THE Irish party consisted of a few gentlemen the majority 
 of whom were Protestants of declared Fenians, of Fenian 
 sympathisers, of ultra-Radicals, of amphibious creatures 
 with flabby natures (of the "jelly-fish " order), of a good 
 many nominal Roman Catholics, also of flabby natures, 
 and of a very few earnest Roman Catholics. Nearly all 
 the Roman Catholics, nominal and sincere, were guided 
 by the Irish priests. What then were the priests ? A few 
 letters of counsel from an acute politician and well-known 
 Irish Roman Catholic gentleman, will make this plain. 
 The first is dated June 6, 1875, " The priests wisely, and in 
 "accordance with their history, sympathise with the aspira- 
 " tions of the people, and thereby direct and control their 
 "action. There are some difficulties, at present, in the 
 " way of creating a Catholic Irish Parliamentary party ; 
 "but they are not insurmountable." Another letter of 
 August 20: "An Irish Catholic member must be a Nation- 
 " alist, within certain limits, to be of weight in the country. 
 " The priests owe their political power, in a great measure, 
 "to their sympathy with national questions." Again, on 
 September 12, he wrote : " The present time is particularly 
 " inopportune for an exclusively Catholic political move- 
 "ment. It has always been considered here, that Catholic 
 " measures are materially advanced, in the House of Com- 
 " mans, by Protestant advocacy. I am sure now, when 
 " educational legislation has become so great a necessity, 
 " the Irish bishops will not sanction any step which would 
 " imperil the unity of the Irish vote, or provoke a charge 
 " of exclusive political sectarianism. But I believe that 
 " the working of the ballot, and the course of events, will 
 "of themselves make the Irish Parliamentary Home Rule 
 " party almost exclusively Catholic." 
 
 The following letter, written on October n, 1875, gives 
 the results of the observations of two sessions : " During
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 139 
 
 "these two sessions I have observed, on the part of the 
 " Home Rule leaders, a determination to keep the whole 
 "management and direction of the party in their own 
 " hands." This, then, was the reason why the Irish party 
 was steeped in wild revolutionary projects, miscalled 
 National. There was the Roman Catholic party, exhibit- 
 ing and acting on the principles of ultra-Liberalism, the 
 principles of revolution ! 
 
 The same acute Roman Catholic politician wrote, on 
 July 6, 1876: "A Catholic party, not identified with 
 " National feeling, is entirely without influence in Ireland. 
 " This may appear strange in so Catholic a people, who 
 " have endured so much for the Faith. But when you 
 "learn that the Irish word Sassenach means, with the 
 " peasantry, a Protestant and an Englishman, you will un- 
 " derstand the religious and political connection. O'Con- 
 " nell understood this ; and it was the secret of his success. 
 " The truth is, that, to give Irish representation popular 
 " support, there must be a political cry : Repeal ; Home 
 " Rule ; anything, no matter how vague, that will give an 
 "opportunity of pointing out the evils of British connec- 
 " tion, and the hope of deliverance." That is to say, an 
 Irish party can subsist only by pandering to the hatred 
 of England, of Englishmen, and of Protestantism ; and by 
 inflaming the desire, and encouraging the hope of separat- 
 ing Ireland from England. 
 
 A large section of the Irish party, who were really 
 aiming at revolution pur et simple, were careful to keep the 
 management of the party in their own hands. They were 
 content to be directed by the priests, but exacted an un- 
 qualified obedience from the party. With the exception of 
 the revolutionary leaders, the rest of the party were supine 
 and careless ; while the priests were only anxious to keep 
 ahead of the people, in what were called National aspira- 
 tions. Moreover, those priests had made for themselves 
 the rule, that all Roman Catholic questions should be 
 worked by Protestants, in order not to arouse a suspicion
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 in the minds of the people of England. A letter, written 
 from Ireland on October 25, 1875, by one of the shrewdest 
 observers of the Irish Roman Catholics, says : " The re- 
 " spectability and intelligence of this country, so far as it is 
 " free to speak, pronounce an opinion, the reverse of com- 
 " plimentary, on the Home Rule actors. This is, no doubt, 
 " discouraging. But it is a state of things almost inevitable 
 " in the commencement of such a movement. It may, 
 " however, be made exceedingly useful in the creation of 
 " an independent Irish party. The ballot is available to 
 'supply the materials, and I trust to time for having them 
 " of a better description than at present. At all events, it 
 " is a necessity, just now, to be a decided Home Ruler. / 
 " believe it will pay in the end" Truly the ballot has been 
 available "to supply materials." But what kind of materials 
 did it supply at the ensuing election of 1880? It is all 
 very fine to " trust to time," when you can do nothing else. 
 It is good to " trust to time " where age is in itself an 
 advantage as in port wine ; or else where decay is desired 
 as in Stilton cheese. But where time is given for the 
 consolidation of false principles ; where time is provided 
 for the public mind to accept fallacies, and to proceed to 
 logical deductions from them ; where time is employed in 
 strengthening, combining, and giving power and influence 
 to an unscrupulous party, which has in view other aims 
 than the good of the Empire ; then time may be trusted 
 to be productive of evils only. When disease assails a 
 valued friend, who trusts to time ? Is not time anticipated, 
 in such a case, by the efforts of the best physicians ? A 
 fell disease had infected the greater part of Ireland. The 
 virus then germinated ; and it spread, in process of time, to 
 England and Scotland. In that case, " trusting to time " 
 was, therefore, the excuse for waiting until the disease 
 should have obtained its full scope, and the virus should 
 have had ample leisure to spread and infect. The aim in 
 view, was not the benefit of the empire of Great Britain. 
 The same acute observer of Irish politics seems, from his
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 141 
 
 letter of February 7, 1878, not to have drawn a warning 
 from his own observations : " I entirely agree with all you 
 "say of the Irish party. . . . Every rational man 
 " knows that the Amendment to the Address was a sham ; 
 " that the Land Bill (Butt's), just defeated, was introduced 
 " to enable the orators to advertise their cheap patriotism, 
 " through the Irish press. Yet the people are gulled by 
 " these displays, and believe in them ; and, to keep one's 
 " place as an Irish representative for a popular constituency, 
 "a person must at least vote on such occasions. The 
 " priests, to preserve their influence in Irish politics, must, 
 " even against their own convictions, go with the popular 
 " voice. Besides, their sympathies, in general, incline that 
 "way. They come from, live by, and are, in their daily 
 " life, associated with the people." It was a mistaken 
 policy, that of the priests. If they had stood out for right, 
 and justice, and law, instead of favouring the crimes of 
 the Land League ; and inflaming the people, from the 
 altar, to rob their landlords ; and inciting them to resist the 
 properly constituted authorities ; if they had corrected the 
 errors of the people, and rebuked their criminal desires, 
 then they would not only have been set up on a moral 
 height above the people, but would have won the respect of 
 the Protestants of England and Scotland. They knew 
 this in their hearts ; for their acts were perpetrated "against 
 "their convictions." Truly " their sympathies inclined that 
 "way;" but the head of their Church, in rebuking "Liberal 
 " Catholics," had warned them that " Liberalism and 
 " (Roman) Catholicism can no more be combined than 
 "darkness and light." He, the supposed infallible head of 
 the Church, proclaimed that " Liberalism and Catholicism 
 " are contradictory," and therefore mutually destructive ; 
 and that he who puts himself at the head of a Liberal 
 movement and furthers it, is doing his best to destroy the 
 light, and substitute for it the realm of darkness : so said 
 the Pope. If that assertion of the "Infallible" is true, 
 then the priests and bishops of Ireland, by their acts and
 
 1 42 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 words, and the Pope himself, by his silence or secret en- 
 couragement, have done their best to substitute infidelity 
 for Romanism, in Ireland. 
 
 The policy of the Irish priests has always been to head 
 the National party ; to keep in advance of the popular 
 aspirations, under the mistaken idea that they would thus 
 retain the lead of the people. For the love of power, they 
 desired to lead. The love of righteousness would have 
 caused them to rebuke. But they chose Mammon rather 
 than God; this world in preference to the eternal. What- 
 ever " the people " cried out for, the priests agitated for. 
 Vox populi, -vox Dei was the false maxim of the Irish 
 priests. " But," said they, " it is better for us to lead them, 
 " than for the Fenians to lead them ; and if we keep ahead 
 "of the popular clamour, the people will follow." No 
 doubt. When Madame Blaize did go before, the king did 
 follow after. Nevertheless, the priests have not retained 
 the lead of the people. When the people began to dance 
 to the piping of the Revolutionists, Nationalists, and 
 Fenians, the priests had to jig still higher to the Revolu- 
 tionary tunes. The Americanised Shan Van Vockt proved 
 a sweeter melody to them than any ecclesiastical compline 
 or chaunt And now the majestic thunders of the Vatican 
 are no longer as potent in Ireland as the stridulent vocifer- 
 ations of a demagogue. Thrice the Pope has anathema- 
 tised the Fenians (on July 5, 1865, October 4, 1869, and 
 January 12, 1870) ; and yet the Fenians are the leaders 
 of the Irish people. Why ? Because the Irish bishops, at 
 their Synod of Maynooth, in 1875, under the presidency of 
 Cardinal Cullen, abjured the Pope's condemnation of them. 
 At the fourth " secret meeting " of the Synod, September 
 7, 1875, the question was whether the Pope's anathema 
 should be inserted in the synodical decrees. The Bishop 
 of Meath and the Bishop of Ferns held that it was in- 
 expedient to condemn. The Bishop of Waterford was for 
 relegating the decree of condemnation to an appendix, as 
 had been done at the Council of Westminster, under Car-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 143 
 
 dinal Manning. The Bishop of Cork was for embodying 
 the condemnation among their decrees, but yet treating 
 the Fenians "cum magnd caritate et benignitate" "with 
 " much love and goodwill ; " and to this course most of the 
 bishops agreed. Thus did the Irish bishops keep ahead 
 of the Fenians. Yet it was not because of any cause of 
 discontent; because in 1867, Mr. Gladstone's programme 
 was arranged in accordance with the desire of the Roman 
 hierarchy. Mr. Gladstone came into office in December, 
 1868; disestablished the Irish Church in 1869; passed a 
 Land Act in 1870; and commenced action on the question 
 of denominational education. 
 
 What, then, was the magic programme of the victorious 
 Irish party, which was everywhere led and supported by 
 the Irish priests, and was successful over the priests in 
 Roscommon and Mayo, the only places where the priests 
 ventured to oppose the Fenians ? It was the conquest, by 
 means of persistent opposition to the law, of more than the 
 followers of Smith O'Brien had hoped for in 1848, or the 
 Fenians themselves in 1867. The "Protestant garrison in 
 " Ireland," as they called the landlords, have been well- 
 nigh removed, and Ireland is waiting, in breathless atten- 
 tion, for the boom of the first foreign gun, in a war with 
 Great Britain, to arise and slaughter, and proclaim their 
 independence of Great Britain. Then also the Jesuits will 
 cause a rising for independence among the French Cana- 
 dians, and the French will declare war on us and help 
 them. That will be the wrath of God. 
 
 No. XXIV. 
 
 THE Romanist people of Ireland, as all the world knows 
 from the occurrences of the last few years, are full of a 
 false and hollow religion, where the priest does all, and the 
 worshipper nothing ; where images, and relics, and rosaries, 
 and medals are invested with the powers of fetiches ; where
 
 144 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 ceremonies are supposed to cleanse, and a few muttered 
 words are held to bestow a pure and childlike innocence of 
 heart. The Romanist Irish are also full of lawlessness, 
 robbery, treachery, conspiracies, and cold-blooded plottings 
 to murder, along with all this religiosity. The Irish party 
 were, in a measure, answerable for the crimes of the Irish; 
 for they led the ignorant people on to mischief ; and kept 
 alive the smouldering embers of agitation. Some English 
 statesmen were as bad, in encouraging the action of the 
 Irish party, in order to compass their own secret ends ; in 
 pretending to serve their country, while they were betray- 
 ing it ; and in professing to do one thing, while they were 
 carrying out a scheme to perpetrate the very opposite. 
 In the terrorism which has reigned for some years in Ire- 
 land, the perfect impunity of the law-breakers has been 
 much remarked and commented on. Hardly any of the 
 perpetrators were caught. Against those few that were 
 caught, but little evidence was forthcoming. In a few 
 glaring cases, men were taken red-handed, and the evidence 
 was overwhelming ; yet there was no conviction. Why 
 would not any ordinary jury convict ? Because of Lord 
 O'Hagan's Act. Lord O'Hagan was the Roman Catholic 
 Lord Chancellor of Mr. Gladstone's Government. By that 
 Act the qualification for service on the jury was lowered, 
 until the jurymen were taken from a class whose ardent 
 sympathy with crime was notorious. 
 
 Again ; the lowest of the people in Ireland, the sym- 
 pathisers with crime, were mostly without votes ; because 
 they did not care to get themselves put upon the register ; 
 and it was no one's business but their own to do so. What 
 did Mr. Gladstone do ? He tried to force votes upon them, 
 and so increase the power of the Irish party. On August 
 i, 1883, the Times contained the following announce- 
 ment : " Much surprise has been caused on the Opposition 
 " side of the House of Commons, particularly among Irish 
 " Conservatives, at the prominence given to the Registra- 
 " tion of Voters (Ireland) Bill. This measure, which is
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 " calculated to strengthen enormously the Nationalist party 
 "in Ireland, will be strongly opposed. It is understood 
 " that in the face of the determined opposition shown from 
 " both sides of the House, the Irish Constabulary Bill 
 "will be abandoned for the present session." Notice was 
 directed to this paragraph by a leader in the same paper, 
 in which we read : " Whatever may be said of the Scotch 
 " Local Government Board Bill, the Irish Registration Bill 
 " can scarcely be said to be of a neutral tint. Within the 
 " past few days no fewer than eight members of the Oppo- 
 sition, English and Irish, have given notice that they will 
 " move its rejection." 
 
 What was Mr. Gladstone to do ? If the Irish party was 
 to be enormously strengthened, by passing the Bill, how 
 was the determined opposition to be got over or broken 
 down ? His old instrument of obstruction must be set to 
 work, in order to break down the House of Commons. 
 Mr. Gladstone's old strategy was not yet understood by 
 the House, and it might be safely resorted to, in order to 
 compass his wishes. The House was kept sitting until 
 twenty minutes to five in the morning. Mr. O'Kelly was 
 silenced by the Speaker ; but a number of his colleagues 
 carried on the game. When the House had been utterly 
 wearied, it could be safely announced that " in view of this 
 "obstruction the Government intend to abandon the Con- 
 " stabulary Bill," in order to " press on the Registration 
 " Bill at this period of the session." The object of the 
 former Bill was to make the police more effective, and so 
 put down the murders and coercive terrorism of the Land 
 League. The object of the latter Bill was to increase, in 
 the constituencies, the voters who would support the party 
 that encouraged the murders and coercive terrorism. Yet 
 the former was to be dropped in order to make way for the 
 latter ! The guardians of order were to be weakened, in 
 order that the promoters of disorder should be strength- 
 ened ! Mr. Gladstone thus announced his intention, with 
 "prodigious cheering " from the Irish party : " With respect 
 
 L
 
 146 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " to the Irish Constabulary Bill, the Government have 
 "come to the conclusion that they could not hope to carry 
 " it without imposing on the House a burden, in respect of 
 " the prolongation of attendance of members, such as they 
 " could not fairly be called on to bear." 
 
 Disaffection was never stronger in Ireland. The ven- 
 geance taken on informers had increased the prestige of 
 the League, and revived the belief In the efficacy of 
 violence. " Force is no remedy " for the ills of Ireland, 
 said Mr. Bright. Force is the remedy for the ills of 
 Ireland, said the Land League. The force which the 
 Government discarded was the force in repressing crime. 
 The force which the Land League was permitted to use 
 was the force of crime, exerted by gangs of marauders 
 and moonlighters, on innocent and law-abiding individuals. 
 The Lord Lieutenant was aware of the danger, and 
 anxiously desired to utilise the last few moments of the 
 expiring session to reform the Constabulary. His aims 
 were thwarted, in order to carry out the aims of the Irish 
 party of disaffection ! Mr. Gladstone did his best to back 
 up Mr. Parnell. Yet the Irish Registration Bill was cer- 
 tainly not urgent. It would have been better to have left 
 the Irish unregistered. Yet the Constabulary Bill was 
 dropped, in order that the Registration Bill might be 
 passed ! 
 
 The Registration Bill was read a first time on April 
 26, 1883. It was then laid in abeyance until the House 
 of Commons had been emptied by exhaustion ; and the 
 second reading was taken on the 4th of August, upon the 
 understanding that the Government had carefully weighed 
 all the details of the Bill, and that they were not going to 
 introduce any ill-considered and crude additions. But 
 when the Bill got into Committee, the Irish party treated 
 the House to some wild and whirling words of vitupera- 
 tion ; and plainly intimated that they must have their own 
 way. The next day, the Irish Secretary, Mr. Trevelyan, 
 rose and complacently offered to alter the whole character
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 147 
 
 of the Bill, so as to satisfy the Irish party. Six new 
 clauses were then added to the thirteen original clauses 
 of the Registration Bill ; and it was then transformed into 
 an Irish Reform Bill. Again the planned and well cal- 
 culated use of Mr. Gladstone's weapon, obstruction, had 
 availed to coerce the Commons of England ; and Mr. 
 Gibson's protest against the new clauses, as conferring a 
 new franchise, and constituting a new Bill, was unavailing. 
 It was not until after the middle of August that this Bill 
 was sent up for the consideration of the Lords. 
 
 Silly persons, who desired to cling to their belief in Mr. 
 Gladstone, invented the excuse that this was done " to 
 "pacify the Irish." Yet Mr. Parnell, at the Dublin banquet, 
 on the nth of December, took care to show that he had 
 no idea of being pacified. With a domineering mien, 
 and the airs of the uncrowned king of the country, he 
 announced his terms. He boasted that, in virtue of Mr. 
 Gladstone's beneficent legislation, the Irish party would 
 be enormously strengthened at the next election ; and that 
 every member of it would be obedient, tanquam cadaver ; 
 and that the Irish party would be the arbiter between the 
 English parties. Then he announced his comprehensive 
 purpose to be that which had been emblazoned on the 
 walls of the banqueting hall : the " National Independence 
 "of Ireland." Mr. Davitt and Mr. Sexton explained 
 National Independence to be something very different 
 from Home Rule ; while Mr. Healy vaunted his party 
 thus : " We shall establish, in this land, once more, a 
 " Parliament, which shall be no mere successor of the 
 " Parliament of the Pale, and no pale echo of the Parlia- 
 " ment of Poyning, miserable and subservient to a foreign 
 " assembly ; but a Parliament which shall be the free and 
 " independent expression of a democratic people." Mr. 
 Sexton very na'fvely showed how, with such a Prime 
 Minister as Mr. Gladstone, they had "seized the munici- 
 " palities ; the civic chairs are ours ; we have won for the 
 " people every elective post in the country ; we have
 
 J48 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " begun, but not yet completed, the work of seizing the 
 " Parliamentary seats in Ireland." Mr. Parnell foretold 
 that the extension of the franchise, in Ireland, by Mr. 
 Gladstone, and a projected measure of "self-government" 
 of Mr. Gladstone's, would carry them to " National Inde- 
 pendence;" and until that point should have been reached, 
 the nefarious schemes of the Land League should be not 
 a whit relaxed. When that "National Independence" 
 has been attained, the Protestant landlords, the Protestant 
 mill-owners, the Protestant inhabitants of Ireland, which 
 are but a fourth of the population, but represent all the 
 intelligence, wealth and enterprise of the land, will be 
 at the mercy of the Romanist majority, with their ignor- 
 ance, religiosity, rapacity, and rebellion. 
 
 No. XXV. 
 
 THE year 1884 began while the controversy concerning 
 the Reform Bill of Mr. Gladstone was raging. Should 
 the Reform Bill extend to Ireland ? Would not the 
 lowering of the county qualification in Ireland most 
 assuredly add to the following of Mr. Parnell and the 
 strength of the Irish Nationalist party? Would it not 
 practically smother the voice of the loyal inhabitants in 
 Ireland ? Such were the questions which some asked, on 
 all sides, in grim earnestness. Others asserted that the 
 effect of excluding Ireland from the operation of the Bill 
 would be to create a real or fancied grievance, and would 
 be a worse evil than treating Ireland on the same footing 
 as the loyal portions of the kingdom. Then it would be 
 wiser to postpone the Reform Bill altogether until -quieter 
 times ? The county householder is not so anxious, after 
 all, to be enfranchised ; and all those amongst them, who 
 are wise and sensible, would rather wait, than create re- 
 newed difficulties in Ireland ; while the unwise and sense- 
 less householders in England would be better without the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 149 
 
 franchise altogether. But that plan would not at all jump 
 with the views and aims of Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Chamberlain, 
 and Sir Charles Dilke. It was not so much the indefeasible 
 right to vote which they cared about, as the admission, to 
 the franchise, of an overwhelming number of low and wild 
 Irishmen. Then why separate your Reform Bill from the 
 Redistribution of Seats ? Why not, in the same bill, enact 
 clauses to reduce three of the provinces to their normal 
 amount of members, while extending to Ulster its due 
 proportion of members ? A just distribution, a fair pro- 
 portion of political power, is all that we desire. Give us 
 that, and you will find that loyal and Protestant Ulster 
 will overbalance the rebellious, Romanist, revolutionary 
 South, and West, and North- West. That was the very 
 justice which the Government desired to avoid. Therefore 
 Sir Charles Dilke, on January 22, said : " I have looked 
 " very carefully into figures, and I much doubt whether it 
 " is the case that a Redistribution, based upon the number 
 " of electors after the Registers have been made out under 
 " equal franchise, will diminish the number of members 
 " who sit for Ireland. . . . My own belief is, that the 
 " Registers will show that Ireland is entitled to about the 
 " present number." At the end of January, Mr. Goschen 
 pointed out that the question of Redistribution was the 
 real crux, especially in Ireland ; and that the Reform Bill, 
 as drawn by the Government, would increase Mr. Parnell's 
 following from thirty-two to ninety, unless, by means of an 
 equitable Redistribution, Ulster should receive an increased 
 number of members due to the number of its electors ; 
 while the Southern, Western, and North- Western Pro- 
 vinces should be clipped down to their fair standard. If 
 this should be done, then he saw that seats would be taken 
 from the Nationalists and handed over to the loyalists. 
 But that was just what Mr. Gladstone had determined 
 should not take place, and had promised Mr. Parnell that 
 he would not do. On the 28th of February, Mr. Gladstone 
 said : "The Bill, if it passes as we present it, will add to
 
 150 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "the English constituency, over 1,300,000; to the Scotch, 
 " over 200,000 ; and to the Irish constituency, over 400,000." 
 Comparing this with the actual number of electors, accord- 
 ing to Mr. Arnold's return, Mr. Forster came to the 
 following results : 
 
 England. Scotland. Ireland. 
 
 Actual Electors. . . 2,618,453 3 I ) 44 I 224,018 
 New Electors . . . 1,300,000 200,000 400,000 
 
 Total . . . 3,918,453 510,441 624,018 
 
 In other words, Mr. Gladstone's Bill would add, to the 
 actual electors in England, just half as many again ; to the 
 Scotch, it added two-thirds as many ; while it made the 
 Irish electors just three times as great. The addition in 
 Ireland was to be taken nearly entirely from the ranks of 
 the Nationalists. Accepting even these totals of electors, 
 however, the number of members for England should have 
 been increased from 489 to 505 ; those for Scotland, from 
 60 to 66 ; while those for Ireland should have been 
 decreased from 103 to 81, giving to each kingdom its 
 proportion according to electors, on the principles pro- 
 fessed by Mr. Gladstone himself. How did Mr. Gladstone 
 escape from such a cogent demonstration ? He announced 
 a new and wonderful principle : that representation should 
 be in proportion to distance from the seat of government ! 
 Very well ; Lancashire is far ; Scotland is far ; Edinburgh 
 is as far as Dublin or Waterford ; Belfast is farther than 
 Dublin ; the Orkneys are much farther than any part of 
 Ireland : carry out your own principle fairly. Oh ! by no 
 means, said Mr. Gladstone ; and, to cut the controversy 
 short, he publicly assured Mr. Parnell that the representa- 
 tion of Ireland should not be reduced ; and that there 
 should be no readjustment which should injure the 
 Nationalist party. What ! said Mr. Goschen, do you 
 say that, in order to increase the power of Irish Romanist 
 disaffection, you are going, most unjustly, to disfranchise
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 151 
 
 English and Scotch boroughs ? Are you bidding defiance 
 to population, revenue, education, loyalty, steadiness, and 
 everything which can render the representative system a 
 safe engine of Government ? And all this to maintain, or 
 rather increase, the power of the Romanist party ! 
 
 It will be remembered that when the Redistribution Bill 
 was afterwards passed, the constituencies were so jerry- 
 mandered and cut up, that a vastly increased influence was 
 given, not only to the Nationalists in Ireland, but also to 
 the 781,000 Irish in the great towns of Great Britain. 
 That was a second edition of "justice to Ireland," which 
 was brought on as soon as that, which is now under con- 
 sideration, had been passed and made safe. Mr. Gladstone 
 bound the Radicals to his car during all this proceeding by 
 saying : If you do not support me, the Irish will vote 
 against the Bill and throw it out, and then you will have 
 no Reform Bill at all ; you must bribe the Irish, by giving 
 them all they ask, or the Liberal Government will be dis- 
 placed. Thus Mr. Gladstone gave an enormous power to 
 Irish Nationalism and Romanism, and "created," as the 
 Times remarked (March 10), " for every Government that 
 " might come thereafter, a perpetual menace of the most 
 "formidable kind." The Times also remarked (March 24), 
 that Mr. Gladstone thus "separated himself from the great 
 " majority of his own party, which sought in vain for any 
 "ground of justice, reason, or expediency on which to base 
 "the proposal to give Ireland a representation dispro- 
 " portioned to her population and her contributions to the 
 " general expenses of Government. . . . It is quite in- 
 " tolerable that, after we had done full justice to Ireland, 
 " by giving her every representative facility which we our- 
 " selves enjoy, we should be asked to rob English and 
 " Scotch constituencies of their legitimate influence, in 
 " order to add to the power of a party which glories in acting 
 " as a hostile and alien force. . . . No minister, how- 
 " ever respected, has a right to propose such an injustice ; 
 "and no party combination, however temporarily useful,
 
 152 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "could excuse so flagrant a betrayal of English and Scotch 
 " constitutional rights." 
 
 Nor was the injustice confined to English and Scotch 
 constituencies. The wrong done to all the loyalists of 
 Ireland was far greater ; because it was proposed to drown 
 their voices utterly in the shrieks and yells of a disloyal 
 and ferocious mob. While these wrongs and this injustice 
 were being perpetrated, Mr. Gladstone insulted his victims 
 in pretending to justify himself, by propounding a most 
 fanciful and ridiculous theory concerning distance! Yet 
 he knew well that, while he encouraged the disloyal and 
 enormously increased their power, he would not change 
 the savage and revolutionary sentiments in a single Irish 
 heart, by the boons he was, with such fell purpose, bestow- 
 ing. He also knew that, to exclude Ireland from the Bill, 
 would not add a single supporter to the party of Parnell. 
 The spirit of disorder and disloyalty ; the aversion to the 
 English rule ; and the desire to escape from it, were so 
 rampant in Ireland, that extraordinary means of asserting 
 the supremacy of law, and maintaining it by force, had to 
 be imposed, with the thankful acclamation of all except 
 the basest and most disloyal of the people. And yet Mr. 
 Gladstone insisted upon putting increased powers into the 
 hands of the disloyal and irritated multitude ; he deter- 
 mined to increase the opportunities of a Hierarchy who 
 had, all of them, in the solemn hour of consecration, taken 
 a solemn oath to persecute and extirpate every heretic in 
 their power. To what did Mr. Gladstone look forward as 
 the result of his action ? To the return of a disloyal party, 
 ninety strong, who will hold the balance between the two 
 English parties ; to a demand for separation from England, 
 and the constitution of an independent Romanist State on 
 the flanks of England, which neither party could venture 
 to refuse, at the risk of being instantly turned out of office ; 
 to the ruin and oppression of all the Protestants of Ulster, 
 and the confiscation of their property ; to a fierce religious 
 war in that country, the Romanist fighting for the power
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 153 
 
 to impose his religion and oppress all the English ; the 
 Protestant struggling for freedom, Christianity, and his 
 political rights. That was Mr. Gladstone's message of 
 peace and justice to Ireland ! Civil war and injustice to 
 Ulster! In 1880 Mr. Gladstone denied the existence of 
 crime and disloyalty in Ireland. Year by year, during his 
 four years of office, that disloyalty had been increased, and 
 crimes had been multiplied ; and yet Mr. Gladstone refused 
 to retrace his steps, and to discard the pandering to Rome 
 which had been the origin of all Ireland's woes ; on the 
 contrary, he sought to swamp for ever the wealth and in- 
 telligence of Ireland, with the votes of a mob so ignorant 
 that they supported the interested tyranny of Rome. 
 Even Mr. Fay, the Roman Catholic member for the County 
 Cavan (Oct. 12), saw the injustice of depriving loyal 
 citizens and the Protestant population of their fair share in 
 the representation ; and he wrote to the papers to deplore 
 the fact that the Protestants of Ireland would be dis- 
 franchised ; and yet he deeply regretted that he should 
 have been forced to come forward to say a word for the 
 Protestants, and to warn them that, in the future, Irish 
 Protestants will have a very limited hope of consideration. 
 
 No. XXVI. 
 
 IN the middle of November, 1884, Lord Granville in the 
 House of Lords, and Mr. Gladstone in the House of 
 Commons, declared " the basis upon which they are pre- 
 " pared to proceed with reference to the Franchise and 
 " Redistribution Bills," namely, by a secret conference 
 between the leaders of the two parties, so as to agree 
 upon the details of a measure which they should impose 
 upon their respective parties. As those quasi-opponent 
 leaders were formally to engage to resist any change 
 which might be proposed in Parliament, this amounted 
 to a transference, to the two leaders, of all the rights and
 
 154 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 powers of all the representatives of the people. Mr. 
 Gladstone who, in a virtuous eagerness to force a Reform 
 Bill on the two Houses, and to give to all the people the 
 votes which were their inherent right proposed to rob 
 the representatives of the people of all voice in legislation, 
 and rob the people of the fruits of the existing franchise. 
 And why? Because the House of Commons, or the 
 House of Lords, might refuse to endorse the injustice 
 which he had committed with the view of extending the 
 power of the Irish Roman Catholic party. This was the 
 deadliest and most insulting blow at Parliamentary 
 Government which any minister had ever dared to commit. 
 Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salisbury, Lord Hartington and 
 Sir Stafford Northcote, were to conspire to give an iniqui- 
 tous preponderance to the Roman Catholics, and to coerce 
 the two Houses of Parliament Verily, it is true that 
 wherever the Roman Catholic Hierarchy have their way, it 
 is always used to strike blows at the liberties of the people. 
 The bargain was struck: and on November 18, the 
 second reading of the Reform Bill was moved by Lord 
 Kimberley, and accepted by Lord Salisbury, in the House 
 of Lords, on the understanding that the leaders were to 
 agree together upon the Redistribution of Seats Bill ; and, 
 as a necessary consequence, that both Houses of Parlia- 
 ment should be obliged to accept the Bill agreed upon by 
 the leaders. In order to facilitate this arrangement, both 
 Houses were adjourned for a week. The mouths of the 
 representatives of the people were thus effectually closed, 
 and ministers were delivered from all fear of inconvenient 
 questions. If the Crown had decreed the law, and if the 
 first knowledge the people or their representatives had of 
 it, had come from reading it in the London Gazette, as an 
 edict of Her Majesty, it would have been better. This 
 would have been absolutism ; but absolutism of an ancient 
 and time-honoured character. That four persons should 
 have assumed to themselves such a power of issuing an 
 edict, which they never had, was both novel and intolerable.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 155 
 
 The Parliamentary system was wholly set aside by them. 
 The idea of representative government was, in fact, denied 
 by those who loudly asserted it, in order to pass a Reform 
 Bill which should benefit the Irish party and the Romish 
 priests. 
 
 When the leaders had agreed, and their Redistribution 
 Bill had been promulgated, it was found that, to attain 
 their secret ends, all principles had been set at nought. In 
 one constituency, a member was allotted to 89,000 electors 
 (St. George's, Hanover Square) ; in another (St. George's 
 in the East), 47,000 inhabitants had a member of their 
 own. In Fulham, 114,000 electors obtained one member ; 
 in Mile End, a population considerably less received two 
 members. The Irish members were jubilant over a mul- 
 titude of the like inequalities, which had all been made in 
 their favour ; and the Nationalist Freeman bore testimony 
 to the joint " statesmanship " of the leaders of the two 
 great parties. Every other section of the House was dis- 
 satisfied. The Irish acquired great gains in Ireland ; while 
 " the single-seat principle " created potential seats for them 
 in England and Scotland. Most men, indeed, saw that the 
 single-seat system must infallibly degrade the character of 
 the new House of Commons ; and all men were agreed 
 that the Irish party would be thereby enormously increased. 
 Out of eighty-five county seats in Ireland, fifty-eight were 
 certain to fall to Mr. Parnell's share (in Leinster, Munster, 
 and Connaught) ; and of the twenty-seven in Ulster, 
 thirteen might be retained by the Loyalists ; and fourteen 
 would probably be won by Mr. Parnell, instead of the 
 three which he had previously enjoyed. Seven out of ten 
 Ulster boroughs were disfranchised ; of which six had 
 always been held by Conservatives, and one had veered 
 from side to side. Moreover, two boroughs, which were 
 continued, were certain to be gained by Mr. Parnell, in 
 consequence of the lowering of the franchise. The Bill 
 reduced the boroughs to eight, with fourteen members. 
 Of these, the Loyalists might gain the four seats of Belfast ;
 
 156 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 while the seven other boroughs would certainly elect ten 
 Nationalists. Thus, eighty-two seats 1 were given to Mr. 
 Parnell, and nineteen to the Loyalists, by Mr. Gladstone 
 and Lord Hartington, by Lord Salisbury and Sir Stafford 
 Northcote. Well might Mr. O'Brien, M.P., on the i6th of 
 December, exclaim at a meeting of the Irish National 
 League : " The Irish people have no reason to be dissatisfied 
 " with the results, so far as the prospects of the Irish cause 
 " are concerned. . . . As to the Franchise Act, it 
 " completed what the Ballot Act began the emancipation, 
 " and, in the true sense of the word, the nationalisation of 
 " the Irish Constituencies. The Ballot Act rendered an 
 " Irish party possible ; and the Franchise Act rendered it 
 "inevitable. . . . The po^ver would hencefonvard be in the 
 " hands of the Irish nation, . . . and they might rest 
 " perfectly satisfied that whoever would be returned, would 
 " be good Irish Nationalists. . . . They might rest satis- 
 " fied that the prospects of the Irish National cause were 
 " tolerably secure in any event." From Dublin, Mr. John 
 McEvoy, a Roman Catholic, wrote to the Times (December 
 20), that "while Cardiganshire, with a population, inclusive 
 "of its merged boroughs, of 73,600, is reduced to a one- 
 " member constituency, four of our Irish counties, with 
 " lesser populations, are to continue to return two members 
 "each, . . . and all four are sure to return Separatists 
 " (Repealers of the Union)." At Newcastle, on the same 
 day, Mr. Leonard Courtney, M.P., late Secretary to the 
 Treasury, complained that : " after the next election, it was 
 " calculated that there would be eighty or ninety representa- 
 " fives of the disloyal people of Ireland returned to the House 
 " of Commons, against ten or t^vel've Loyalists; whereas the 
 "proportion of the loyal people was much larger than 
 "that. This would tend to crush the aspirations out of 
 " those Loyalists who, by our present system, would be 
 " unrepresented ; and it would mislead the English people 
 " as to the proportion of loyal and disloyal people in 
 1 Eighty-six, as a matter of fact.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 157 
 
 " Ireland." Mr. O'Kelly, M.P., a Roman Catholic, speak- 
 ing on the 22nd of December, said : " The work which had 
 " been done in the present Parliament had successfully laid 
 " the foundation of their political programme, which had 
 " for its ultimate object the re-creation of the politicalindepen- 
 " dence of their country. That was their crowning work ; and 
 " until they saw an Irish Parliament assembled in Dublin, 
 "the work could not, and would not, be regarded as 
 "complete." Mr. Redmond, M.P., at the same meeting, 
 said : " It was their duty to show, by their determined 
 " attitude, that they would not take the Land Act as a 
 "settlement of the question. They would be the veriest 
 "fools if they did. . . . Please God, and I say this 
 " from my heart, the time may come when, if we do not 
 "get liberty, we may perhaps be able, in the difficulties of 
 " England, to right our country. . . . With everything 
 " we get from the Government we will say : We only receive 
 " these things as means towards an end ; and we will not 
 "cease from struggling, until we have restored to this 
 " country, the right to rule herself." On the 2ist of January, 
 1885, Mr. Parnell said, at Cork: "At the election in 
 " 1880 1 laid certain principles before you, and you accepted 
 " them. I said, and I pledged myself, that I should form 
 " one of an independent Irish party, to act in opposition to 
 " every English Government which refused to concede the 
 "just rights of Ireland ; and the time which has gone by 
 " since, has more than ever convinced me that that is the 
 "true policy to pursue, so far as Parliamentary policy is 
 " concerned ; and that it will be impossible for either, or 
 "both of the English parties, to contend for any long time 
 " against a determined band of Irishmen acting honestly 
 "upon these principles, and backed by the Irish people." 
 Then passing to the Reform Bill, he said : " The electors 
 "who will be swamped in the great mass of Irishmen now 
 "admitted to the rights of the Constitution, so far as those 
 " rights exist in this country, were on the whole faithful to 
 " their trust. . . . But / look forward to the future with
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " a ligJit heart. I am convinced that five or six hundred 
 "thousand Irishmen, who within a year must vote for the 
 " men of their choice, will be as true to Ireland, and even 
 " truer to Ireland, than those who have gone before them ; 
 " and that we may safely trust to them the exercise of the 
 " great and important privilege, unequalled in its greatness 
 "and its magnitude in the history of any nation, which will 
 " shortly be placed upon them. I am convinced that, when 
 "the reckoning up comes, after the general election of 
 " 1885, that we in Ireland shall have cause to congratulate 
 "'ourselves in the possession of a strong party, which will bear 
 " doivn all opposition, and which, aided by tlie organization 
 " of our country behind us, will enable us to gain for our 
 " country those rights which were stolen from us. We shall 
 " struggle, as we have been struggling, for the great and 
 " important interests of the Irish tenant farmer. We shall 
 " ask that his industry shall not be fettered by rent. We 
 " shall ask also from the farmer, in return, that he shall do 
 " what in him lies to encourage the struggling manufactures 
 " of Ireland, and that he shall not think it too great a 
 " sacrifice to be called upon, when he wants anything, to 
 "consider how he may get it of Irish material and manu- 
 " facture, even supposing he has to pay a little more for it. 
 " . . . But I go back from the consideration of these 
 " questions, to the consideration of the great question of 
 " National Self-Government for Ireland. I do not know 
 " how this great question will be eventually settled. I do 
 " not know whether England will be wise in time, and 
 "concede, to constitutional arguments and methods, the 
 " restitution of that which was stolen from us towards the 
 " close of the last century. . . . We cannot ask for less 
 " than the restitution of Grattan's Parliament, with its 
 " important privileges and wide and far-reaching constitu- 
 " tion. We cannot, under the British Constitution, ask for 
 " more than the restitution of Grattan's Parliament. But 
 " no man has tJie right to fix the boundary to the march of 
 " a nation ; no man has a right to say to his country, ' TJms
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 159 
 
 "'far skalt tJwu go, and no further* ; and we have never 
 " attempted to fix the ne phis ultra to the progress of 
 " Ireland's nationhood, and we never shall." Let us observe 
 the programme of Mr. Parnell which Mr. Gladstone and 
 Lord Salisbury, Sir Stafford Northcote and Lord Hart- 
 ington have enabled him now to accomplish. The farmer 
 is to pay no rent. The Irish Protestant landlords are to 
 be ruined and made beggars. The Land Act, and its 
 judicial rents, which were fixed for fifteen years, are to be 
 scattered to the winds. There is to be a strict protection 
 for Irish manufactures and Irish produce ; and a heavy 
 import duty on everything English. They are to have 
 Grattan's Parliament, as long as they choose to remain 
 " under the British Constitution." As Poyning's Law (of 
 1494), and the Act of the 6th of George I. were repealed in 
 1782, Grattan's Parliament was a Parliament which enacted 
 all the laws relating to Ireland ; which had the sole right 
 of voting taxes ; which could refuse to pass a Mutiny Act, 
 and so disband all soldiers in that territory ; and which 
 could impose any restrictions on trade or commerce, and 
 forbid the import of any English goods. But that is while 
 they are "under the British Constitution." The words 
 that follow point as clearly as possible to utter separation 
 from England, and the Constitution of Ireland as an in- 
 dependent and ever hostile Roman Catholic State. 
 
 No. XXVII. 
 
 MR. PARNELL remained at Cork after that speech of the 
 2 ist of January; and made another speech on the 23rd, 
 in which he said : " I believe that, in the near future, we 
 " shall win our battle. The admission of the masses of the 
 " people to the franchise is a most important help ; for it 
 " will be possible now, for the first time, to bring out what 
 " the real opinion of the Irish people is upon this question 
 " (of separation from England). . . . When we have a
 
 160 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "united representation from Ireland amounting to eighty - 
 " five members, it will be impossible for any people, for any 
 " Parliament, even so intolerant and haughty an assembly 
 " and people as the English Parliament and people, long 
 " to withstand our claims. We have great helps. We have 
 "a race greater than our own across the Atlantic. We 
 " have a growing and influential population in Australia. 
 "We have large contingents in England and in Scotland. 
 " . . . / know that England has already, in her own 
 " heart, given up the contest; and that it only remains for 
 " you to be as determined and true as your brothers and 
 " sisters in other parts of the world, to enable us and you 
 " to gain that restitution which is our right, and less than 
 "which we shall never accept." Great helps Mr. Parnell 
 certainly has had in Mr. Gladstone, the English Ministry, 
 and the English Opposition. Great helps they hope to 
 have from America, when they put themselves under the 
 protection of the United States, and are prepared to fight 
 under the Stars and Stripes. Great helps they will have 
 in the Colonies, when the Irish in these dependencies rise 
 in rebellion, if they do not succeed in influencing the 
 Colonial Governments in likewise taking part against 
 England, and putting themselves under the protection of 
 the United States. Great helps they will have from the 
 numberless masses of Irish in the large towns of England 
 and Scotland ; for all these will rise against England's 
 power, and paralyse her action as soon as she declares war 
 against any foreign power. " England's difficulty is Ire- 
 land's opportunity." That is a maxim which I have 
 heard repeated, over and over again, in Ireland ; and 
 assuredly the dynamite which we are carrying in our 
 bosom will some day explode and destroy us, unless it be 
 at once rendered powerless. Sir Bartle Frere told me that 
 the Boer war had been stirred up entirely by a Fenian of 
 the name of Aylward, and another Fenian whose name I 
 forget. That was done, by the Jesuit party in the Roman 
 Catholic Church, in order to create a difficulty for England.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 161 
 
 That household enemy of ours has in every way been 
 strengthened by Mr. Gladstone. The journals of May 27, 
 1885, informed us that the same Alfred Aylward, Captain 
 Mullen, and Crosby stirred up Kiel's recent rebellion in 
 Canada, by instigating the French Roman Catholic Cana- 
 dians to seek a separation from England. To such an 
 inexorable enemy, Mr. Gladstone has combined with the 
 Opposition to give power ! The glamour of the Roman 
 Church has paled his patriotism. 
 
 While the loyal minority in Ireland felt that Mr. Glad- 
 stone's legislation had completely effaced them, and made 
 the enemies of Protestantism and of England irresistible, 
 Sir Charles Gavan Duffy (January 31, 1885), wrote an 
 article in the National Reviezu, offering, on the part of the 
 Nationalist party, to combine with the Loyalists, in arrang- 
 ing their differences amicably, and renouncing the connec- 
 tion with England. Many Loyalists, indeed, had been 
 wearied out, and disheartened, and thought it wiser to 
 renounce the faithless English Government, and make the 
 best terms they could with their enemies ; because the 
 struggle they regarded as hopeless, and the power of the 
 Romanists as overwhelming. Not more than two seats, 
 besides the University seats, can the Loyalists hope to 
 gain outside Ulster. Ulster itself is under-represented, in 
 respect of population ; while the other three provinces are 
 over-represented. In every constituency in Ulster, more- 
 over, the boundaries have been so arranged as to give the 
 Romanist minority the certainty of representation (which 
 has been done also in the large towns of England and 
 Scotland), so that the Protestant majority of Ulster, repre- 
 senting all the loyal population of Ireland, cannot command 
 more than thirteen seats out of the thirty-three members 
 which Ulster is to return ; and these thirteen they cannot 
 secure except by sinking the differences of Tory and 
 Liberal, and working as one party in the struggle. This 
 has been done by Mr. Gladstone, and agreed to by Lord 
 Salisbury and Sir Stafford Northcote, in the face of the 
 
 M
 
 1 62 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 fact that they have left, to the disloyal counties of Leinster, 
 the right of returning two Nationalist members apiece. 
 On February 18, a deputation of Ulster members of Par- 
 liament waited on Sir Stafford Northcote, and laid those 
 facts before him. In his reply, which was most involved, 
 misty, and unsatisfactory, he said : " You have put before 
 " me, with great force, and, I have no doubt, with great 
 "truth, the prospect you see before you of the elements 
 "which we call Parnellism, or the disloyal party, being 
 " largely in the majority in Ireland, under the operation of 
 " the proposed (Redistribution of Seats) Bill. You natu- 
 " rally feel that to be a serious matter ; and we all feel so. 
 "It is not a question of Conservatism alone; but it appeals 
 " to those who love the British constitution, and desire to 
 " see it maintained. It is a serious thing that that increase 
 " should take place ; but we have got to ask how far it is 
 "due to the provisions of this particular Bill before us, 
 " and how far other circumstances may contribute to it." 
 The deputation were displeased at not receiving a promise 
 from Sir Stafford to resist the proposed injustice. After 
 considerable pressure, Sir Stafford then added, " I feel 
 "the position is one that will be extremely annoying, 
 " painful, and, to a certain extent, dangerous to the Loyalist 
 " party in Ireland ; . . . but perhaps when we come 
 " to see the working of this Bill, matters will not be so bad 
 " as they are represented. . . . You propose that we 
 "should endeavour to make some change in the Bill. 
 " Well, in the first place, we do not know what the nature 
 " of the report of the Boundary Commissioners will be, or 
 " what will be the divisions which they recommend. . . . 
 " I am sorry to hear the suggestion made by one of the 
 " deputation, that there was unfairness on the part of the 
 " Boundary Commissioners in Ireland ; that they were 
 " less impartial than we believe they were in this country. 
 " I hope that was not the case; and perhaps it is premature 
 " to assume that it is so." The deputation continued to 
 press him ; but without any further result. Two days
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 163 
 
 afterwards (February 20), the Ulster Conservatives con- 
 vened a meeting at St. Stephen's Chambers, Westminster, 
 to discuss what " hopes of support from the leaders of the 
 " Conservative party " might be looked for ; and it was 
 reported that " little, if any, support could be expected 
 "from Sir Stafford Northcote and the Marquis of Salis- 
 " bury " ; and it was decided, on the motion of the Marquis 
 of Hamilton, seconded by Sir Thomas Bateson, " to form 
 " an Independent Irish Conservative party for the protec- 
 " tion of the Loyalists of Ireland." 
 
 In an able article on this subject in the St. James s 
 Gazette on Feb. 27, 1885, after balancing the superior 
 numbers of the disloyal party, against the "vast prepon- 
 " derance of the industry, the enterprise, the wealth, and 
 " the intelligence " on the other side, the writer very truly 
 and very mournfully added : " It would be easy to show 
 " that, for more than half a century, England has sys- 
 tematically used her authority in Ireland to weaken the 
 " part of the population faithful to her, by causing it to be 
 "overwhelmed by the growing multitude of its adversaries ; 
 " and now the power of the British Legislature is to be 
 "employed, under the direction of the British Executive 
 " Government, finally to place the Loyalists of Ireland under 
 " the heel of their enemies. . . . The result which is 
 " likely to occur is that, under the Franchise Act, and the 
 "proposed Redistribution Bill, the Irish Conservatives, 
 " whom Mr. Parnell himself would allow to be nearly 
 "synonymous with the Loyalists, will be very grossly 
 " under-represented in the new Parliament. It is even 
 " said that Mr. Parnell's hordes will sweep them out of all 
 " the constituencies, except, perhaps, the City, County, 
 " and University of Dublin, and one, or perhaps two 
 " counties in Ulster. ... It is hardly too much to 
 " say that the fate of the Empire is put in jeopardy, if 
 " the whole Irish representation is unfairly and illogically 
 " handed over to Mr. Parnell. But if it is really out of 
 " the power of the Conservative leaders to save their
 
 1 64 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Irish followers, the cause must lie in the agreement about 
 " Redistribution with the Government, which will have had, 
 " in this case, the most disastrous of consequences." 
 
 On the motion for going into committee on the 
 Redistribution Bill, Mr. Healy, an Irish Nationalist mem- 
 ber, crowed like a dung-hill cock. Mr. Ewart complained 
 that, whilst the Loyalists were entitled to one-third of the 
 representation, they did not get, under the Bill, quite one- 
 sixth. Mr. Trevelyan, a member of the Cabinet, lately 
 Irish Secretary, said : " He did not imagine that the 
 "Bill could be seriously distasteful to the Parnellite 
 " party. It would be difficult for even the ablest of those 
 " /ton. members, wJio had what they would call Irish sym- 
 " pat/ties, to frame any scheme more favourable to them, 
 " which would have the slightest chance of being accepted 
 "by the House." On the ;th of March, the Irish 
 Secretary, Mr. Campbell- Bannermann declared that : " In 
 "no instance could a case be made out against the 
 " Commissioners, of having decided unfairly against the 
 "Nationalists, or of having jerrymandered a constituency 
 " in favour of the Protestant party" Of course ; the 
 Protestants, the Loyalist party, have been deliberately 
 sacrificed by Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salisbury. If there 
 has been any jerrymandering of constituencies, it has not 
 been in favour of them. Nor is it they alone who have 
 been sacrificed. The few loyal Roman Catholics are also 
 victims ; for the educated Roman Catholics of the upper 
 and middle classes go along with the Protestants in that 
 respect. The Loyalist party, which has been sacrificed, 
 consists of all except the Nationalist mob, with the Popish 
 bishops and priests. On March II, Mr. Lewis, the 
 Loyalist Irish member for Derry, said : " The Franchise 
 " Bill and the Seats Bill were framed in such a way as to 
 " throw the greatest amount of power into the hands of 
 " the disloyal portion of the community ; and the Nemesis 
 " will be the strengthening of the demand for the repeal 
 "of the Union." The Nemesis? Oh, Mr. Lewis, you
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 165 
 
 have your eyes but half open ! Awake from sleep ! That 
 is the very end that Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salisbury 
 evidently have in view. Mr. Gladstone is no fool ; and 
 he has shaped his means most cleverly to his end. 
 
 On this occasion, Cabinet Minister Trevelyan was, or 
 pretended to be, most indignant. Others reverted, in 
 memory, to Mr. Trevelyan's speech at Hawick, while he 
 was still Chief Secretary. Then it was that he expressed 
 " the profound disappointment of the Government ; " be- 
 cause he too had his eyes nearly shut. He spoke what 
 he thought was true ; but he did not see the truth. He 
 acknowledged that he had fostered the "National League," 
 as a " legitimate agitation ; " and he imagined that the 
 Government were profoundly disappointed at its turning 
 out exactly the same as the " Land League," in all except 
 the name. He continued : " As to its character, there is 
 " no doubt whatever. Most of the public meetings of the 
 " National League are held for the purpose of conducting 
 " a future and undisguised agitation for three objects : (i) 
 " The destruction of Landlordism; (2) The breaking up of 
 " the grazing farms, by terrorizing the tenant farmers ; and 
 " (3) The separation of Great Britain and Ireland." Mr. 
 Trevelyan was indignant then ; Mr. Gladstone saw in it 
 the progress of his designs. Mr. Trevelyan expressed his 
 " profound disappointment ; " and Mr. Gladstone removed 
 him from the post of Irish Secretary. Yet Mr. Trevelyan 
 supported a Franchise Bill, and Seats Bill, which would 
 certainly treble the power of the National League ; and 
 then Mr. Trevelyan was irritated because Mr. Lewis re- 
 minded him that he was conferring power on " the men 
 " who foment, and condone, and sympathise with crime." 
 O tempora I O mores I
 
 1 66 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. XXVIII. 
 
 WE must not suppose that the Conservative party were 
 satisfied with the betrayal effected by their leaders. They 
 expressed themselves strongly, and testified by their acts 
 that they were on the verge of rebellion against the leaders 
 who had rebelled against the professed principles of the 
 party. Something had to be done. On the i6th of 
 March, Lord Salisbury and Sir Stafford Northcote called a 
 meeting of Conservative members, at the Carlton Club, 
 and declared that they would resign their posts, unless the 
 party would accept the Seats Bill. 
 
 The leaders had already agreed with Mr. Gladstone and 
 Lord Granville to do that which the Conservative party 
 regarded as the ruin of Protestantism in Ireland. If the 
 party should prove recalcitrant, there was an end to the 
 success of the unholy compact. The party had, therefore, 
 to be cajoled or coerced. Lord Salisbury and Sir Stafford 
 Northcote chose the latter method. No time was to be 
 lost ; because already, on the question of limiting the 
 representation of the City of London to only two members, 
 Sir Stafford Northcote had not been able to take more 
 than three Conservatives into the lobby with him (Mr. 
 Gardner, Mr. Dalrymple, and Mr. Edward Stanhope) ; 
 while 108 Conservatives (including one ex-minister, the 
 brother of Lord Salisbury) voted against him. If such a 
 feeling should grow, so that the absentee malcontents 
 should come up to vote, it would be fatal. Therefore the 
 meeting was hastily called together at the Carlton Club. 
 Sir Stafford Northcote frankly acknowledged that " the 
 " measure was the outcome of an arrangement between the 
 " Cabinet of Mr. Gladstone, and the leaders of the Opposi- 
 " tion, who therefore felt themselves under an obligation 
 " loyally to stand by the main provisions of the Bill." A 
 great deal of dissatisfaction was then expressed, at the 
 meeting, because " the interests of the Loyalists in the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 167 
 
 " North of Ireland had been sacrificed." Lord Salisbury 
 said he was " equally responsible with Sir Stafford North- 
 " cote for the terms of the compact." 
 
 It is a pity that the members of the party allowed them- 
 selves to be coerced, by a threat of resignation, on the part 
 of those who had betrayed their trust, and sacrificed the 
 principles they professed. If the party had continued to 
 be recalcitrant, the Parnellites could no longer have 
 preached rapine and treason, under the protecting bayonets 
 of the Royal Irish Constabulary. The Liberal party had 
 for a long time been over-ridden by Mr. Gladstone's strong 
 and domineering will ; and they had, for some time, been 
 content to be muzzled. They were therefore delighted to 
 see how easily the Conservative party also could be cowed 
 and silenced by leaders who were irritated at seeing their 
 followers vote as their local knowledge, their common 
 sense, and their consciences directed. The Conservative 
 party were told that Lord Salisbury and Sir Stafford North- 
 cote must fulfil their " honourable obligations " ; and therefore 
 their party must submissively support them in their course 
 of dishonour. The leaders of the two parties had met in a 
 disgraceful cabal, in violation of Parliamentary indepen- 
 dence, and arranged a compact, by which the disloyal 
 Romanists should obtain an irresistible power, for the 
 subversion of the Empire. The result was a Bill, which 
 neither party in Parliament was to be allowed to alter, 
 even in the minutest detail. A worse conspiracy for the 
 destruction of the Constitution, the annihilation of 
 Parliament, and the re-establishment of Popery, was 
 never made, even in the reign of King James II. 
 
 The Conservative party did not conserve the Constitution, 
 and had nothing to gain by supporting the compact. They 
 were frightened by the threats of those terrible resignations ; 
 they violated the Constitution ; they sold the right of 
 Parliament to criticise, judge, and vote ; they put power 
 into the hands of Romanists and Revolutionists ; and they 
 got absolutely nothing in return. They have enabled the
 
 1 68 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Parnellites to return to Parliament with a powerful party, 
 which will hold the balance between the two great English 
 parties, and keep in or turn out Ministries at pleasure ; a 
 powerful party which has plainly given warning that it will 
 separate Ireland from England ; a party that will dispossess 
 all the present owners of property in Ireland ; a party that 
 avows its intention of putting Ireland under the protection 
 of the United States of America ; a party which has 
 pointed to our Colonies, and the growing Irish populations 
 in them, and more than hinted that it will separate them 
 also from the Mother-Country, and make of them one 
 great Republic in alliance against us ; a party which there- 
 fore calls itself " the Irish Republican Brotherhood " : they 
 have done all this ; and what have they got in return ? 
 perhaps five months of office ! 
 
 It is for the embryo of that Romanist and Republican 
 party that Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salisbury, Sir Stafford 
 Northcote and Lord Hartington insured the permanent 
 and uncontrolled supremacy in Ireland ! This has been 
 done, moreover, in the face of Lord Hartington's declara- 
 tion that it would be " madness " to strengthen those forces 
 of sedition. It has been excused by the pretext of " prin- 
 "ciples of eternal justice;" and "absolute equality be- 
 " tween the three kingdoms ; " an equality which consists 
 in adding only one-third more to the electorate of England, 
 because these new voters are Protestant and loyal ; only 
 two-thirds more to the electorate of Scotland, because these 
 new voters are Protestant and loyal, and Liberal ; but 
 twice as many again to the electorate of Ireland, because 
 these new voters are Romanist and disloyal ; because they 
 hiss the Queen, and cheer for the Mahdi and Czar ; because 
 three-quarters of them (May 3, 1885), according to Mr. 
 Parnell's own showing, receive medical relief from the 
 rates, and are disqualified for the franchise. But, as they 
 are utterly ignorant, and ready to do the bidding of the 
 priests, from " carding " old women who pay rent, to 
 shooting landlords, and blowing up with dynamite ; there-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 169 
 
 fore Mr. Gladstone passes the Irish Registration Bill, to 
 give them the vote in spite of their disqualifications and 
 ignorance. More than half a million of the new electors 
 are in Ireland, and are lusting after the land that is not 
 theirs. They have been over-represented by Mr. Gladstone's 
 Reform and Redistribution Bills ; while Protestant English- 
 men and Scotchmen have been under-represented. In the 
 great towns of England and Scotland, also, there are 
 innumerable Irishmen who are ready to vote on either 
 side, at the word of command, just as they do in Ireland. 
 All these men, according to the speeches of their ex- 
 ponents, breathe only two sentiments : Undying animosity 
 to Protestant England, and English rule throughout the 
 world ; and, as a means to the gratification of that ani- 
 mosity, a firm resolution to oust the Protestant landlords 
 from Ireland, by a continued process of robbery. The 
 Irish policy may, therefore, be summed up in two words : 
 Rapine and Dismemberment ; the destruction of the 
 landlords ; the separation of Ireland from England ; and 
 the constitution of Ireland as an autonomous Roman 
 Catholic State. To that, Archbishop Croke's announce- 
 ment amounted, on his return from Rome to Dublin, on 
 June 3, 1885. Or let us, in preference, turn to Mr. Parnell, 
 and hear his speech at the banquet of the Irish Parlia- 
 mentary party, on the anniversary of the massacre of St. 
 Bartholomew (Aug. 24). Mr. Justin McCarthy presided 
 at that dinner in Dublin ; and all the members of the party 
 were present. Mr. Parnell said : " Although, during this 
 "Parliament which has just expired, we may have said 
 " very little about Home Rule, very little about legislative 
 " independence, very little about the repeal of the Union, 
 " yet I know well that from each of our hearts the thought 
 " of how these good things might be best forwarded was 
 " never for a moment absent, and that no body of Irishmen 
 "ever met together who have more consistently worked, 
 " and worked with a greater effect, for that which always 
 " must be the hope of our nation until its realization
 
 iyo RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "arrives. We might, I say, refer to those legislative 
 " achievements ; we might refer to the Land Act, an 
 "admirable measure in its way, even an unthought-of 
 " measure at the time when many of us have come into 
 " political life ; we might refer to the Arrears Act ; we 
 " might dwell on the Franchise Act, under which almost 
 " manhood suffrage has been conceded to Ireland ; we 
 "might recall to our recollection the Redistribution Act, 
 " under which, despite the open hostility of one party and 
 " the badly concealed envy of the other, we succeeded in 
 " getting, in the new Parliament, the full representation 
 " of Ireland without the loss of a single man. But these 
 " things, although important in themselves, are not, as I 
 " have said, the end and aim of our existence as a party ; 
 " and although we cannot refuse, and never have refused, 
 " good measures although we have always, and wisely, I 
 " think, made it part of our programme to gain for Ireland 
 " such concessions as might be got at the time, provided 
 " we did not sacrifice greater and more enduring national 
 " interests yet we have always got before us that we were 
 " sent from this country not to remain long in Westminster, 
 "but to remember that it was for us to look upon our 
 "presence there as a voluntary one, and to regard our 
 " future, our legislative future, as belonging to our own 
 " native country of Ireland. I therefore prefer not to 
 "dwell upon these important legislative enactments 
 " which, as I have said, are all of them means to an end 
 " but to consider two things which are even more 
 " pleasing to my mind than any such matters. . . . And 
 " what is our present position ? It is admitted by all parties 
 " that you have brought the question of legislative indepen- 
 "dence to the point of solution. ... I have already 
 " spoken of the past and of the immediate future, and I 
 " shall ask you to accompany me for a moment a little 
 " beyond that, to a time when Ireland, having prudently 
 "and sagaciously selected her eighty or eighty- five repre- 
 " sentatives, shall have sent them over to the battle, and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 17 1 
 
 " as we all hope and believe, the final battle. What will be 
 " the new programme ? It has been the custom to include 
 "a number of measures in addition to the great measure 
 "of all, the restoration of an Irish Parliament, the con- 
 " cession of legislative independence. ... I hope that 
 " it may not be necessary for us, in the new Parliament, to 
 " devote our attention to subsidiary measures, and that it 
 " may be possible for us to have a programme and a plat- 
 "form with only one plank, and that one the plank of 
 " national independence. I feel convinced, comrades, that 
 " our great work and our sole work in the new Parliament 
 " will be tJte restoration of our own Parliament. And when 
 " we have obtained it, what will be its functions and what 
 " will be its powers ? We shall require our new Parliament 
 " to do those things which we have been asking the British 
 " Parliament to do for us. ... I therefore feel assured 
 " that the next Irish party that will be assembled will be 
 " the last in the English and the first in the restored Irish 
 " Parliament." 
 
 That was a manifesto of the greatest importance ! The 
 Irish party had hitherto said little or nothing concerning 
 the separation of Ireland from England, but they had 
 always meant it ; and all the deeds they had done were 
 but means to that one end the autonomy of Ireland as 
 a Roman Catholic State. Mr. Parnell was confident in 
 attaining that end within the next year ; because the 
 compact between Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salisbury had 
 made it certain ; and the increased Irish party of ninety 
 members would sweep all before it. On the 2 5th Mr. 
 Parnell added : " We are bound to win ; no matter which 
 " of the English parties wins, we are bound to win." It 
 is no question of Home Rule ; no question of Local Self- 
 government ; but the separation of Ireland, and her con- 
 stitution as an autonomous Roman Catholic State. What 
 will be the effect of that measure ? the same as it was at 
 the end of last century ; the Executive will be utterly 
 paralysed, except the Irish Parliament should be open to
 
 172 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 bribes, as it was before. Protestant England will be utterly 
 paralysed ; and then will come the hey-day and high jinks 
 of the Jesuit party ! That is the result which the compact 
 between Lord Salisbury and Mr. Gladstone, Sir Stafford 
 Northcote and Lord Hartington has secured. 
 
 NO. XXIX. 
 
 A YEAR before his death, Lord Beaconsfield published his 
 last and most valuable novel, " Endymion." It was strictly 
 an historical novel. It brought history down to the begin- 
 ning of his own career as a Minister of the Crown ; and 
 was to have been followed by another novel, which would 
 have continued, under the garb of fiction, the tale of his 
 own life and contemporary events. But the hand of Death 
 was laid upon him, and placed an interdict on the projected 
 publication. 
 
 While treating, in " Endymion," of the period just before 
 the passing of the Reform Bill, he, in spite of his Pro- 
 testant professions, wrote not a word of disapproval, nor 
 did he drop a hint derogatory to the action of the Duke of 
 Wellington in passing the Roman Catholic Emancipation 
 Act of 1829. He merely remarked that this Act was the 
 first revival of Roman Catholicism in England, and " led 
 " to the establishment of the Catholic Hierarchy in 1850." 
 Towards the close of the novel, Lord Beaconsfield de- 
 scribed, in terms of sarcasm, the Durham letter of Lord J. 
 Russell (" Endymion," iii., 312), which he termed " the Anti- 
 " papal Manifesto." That letter was written to stir the 
 lifeless, inattentive spirit of England against the establish- 
 ment of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in England. But, 
 as Lord Beaconsfield remarks, it only occasioned the down- 
 fall of the Ministry. So powerful, even at that time, were 
 the intrigues of the Romanist prelates and Jesuits ! The 
 Jesuit reviewer, in the " Stimmen aus Maria Laach " (March, 
 1881), remarked : "This is no bad hint for English poli-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 173 
 
 "ticians ; and for foreign politicians too ! " meaning that all 
 those statesmen, in all countries, who act against the Roman 
 Catholic Church, are doomed to destruction. 
 
 Throughout the three volumes of " Endymion," Lord 
 Beaconsfield exhibits as strong a sympathy with the 
 Roman Church as he could prudently avow. Take, for 
 example, the conversation between the Roman Catholic 
 Archbishop and Endymion. There the Jesuits come in for 
 a large share of laudation, and receive expressions of affec- 
 tion. " The influence of the Jesuits is the influence of 
 " Divine truth ; and how is it possible for such an influence 
 " not to prevail ? " " The Jesuits never fell, except from 
 " conspiracy against them ; it is never the public voice that 
 " demands their expulsion, nor the public effort that ac- 
 "complishes it." Endymion then expresses a hope that 
 the Jesuits will have as little influence in his brother-in- 
 law's kingdom, as they have in England ; whereupon the 
 Archbishop exclaims : "As little ! I should be almost content 
 " if the Holy Order in every country had as much influence 
 " as they now have in England ! Before two years are past, 
 " I foresee that the Jesuits will be privileged in England, 
 " and the Hierarchy of our Church recognised " (vol. iii., 
 255, 256). We may, in passing, remark a curious illustra- 
 tion of this truth in an inspired article, entitled, " Rome 
 " and England," which was published in the Osservatore 
 Romano, of May 6, 1881, the well-known Papal organ. It 
 affirmed that Roman Catholicism had, of late years, made 
 considerable progress in England ; and it supposed that 
 many Roman Catholic nations must envy our Protestant 
 State that liberty which it allows to their English co- 
 religionists. It then adduced, as the most recent proof, 
 the appointment of Lord Ripon as Viceroy of India ; and 
 asserted that the attitude of the English Government to- 
 wards the Roman Catholic Church, enabled that Church 
 to exercise to the full her beneficent influence. The 
 Roman Observer then prophesied as follows : " The time 
 " will come when people will recognise the good work
 
 174 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " which can be accomplished by the Roman Catholic 
 " Church, if she is not disturbed in her mission." It added 
 that it saw reason to hope that " the Gladstone Ministry 
 " would, before long, re-establish the relations which formerly 
 "existed between England and the Holy See /" or, in other 
 words, appoint a British Ambassador to the Pope in return 
 for a Papal nuncio to St. James's. 
 
 The heroine of " Endymion," whose beauty, grace, talents, 
 and warmth of heart are so depicted as to render her highly 
 attractive, is presented to us as a convert to Roman Ca- 
 tholicism. The conversation between Waldershare (who 
 represents Mr. Gladstone), and Prince Florestan, is equally 
 remarkable. The Liberal minister, Waldershare, had fallen 
 completely under the influence of the Roman Catholic 
 Archbishop : " he was fairly captivated by him." The 
 Prince Florestan said to him, " My friends (the French) 
 " are Roman Catholics nominally Roman Catholics ; if I 
 " were quite sure your man (the Prime Minister) and the 
 " (Anglican) priests generally were Roman Catholics, 
 " something might be done." " As for that," said Walder- 
 share, " sensible men are all of the same religion." " And 
 " pray which is that ? " " Sensible men never tell " (vol. iii., 
 135). That is, they hold to the Roman Church in their 
 hearts, while they restrain their tongues, and control their 
 acts, so that their real faith may not appear. They serve 
 the Roman Church in secret, while openly they proclaim 
 themselves to be ultra-Protestants. According to Lord 
 Beaconsfield, a Liberal minister can do this ; and Ritualists 
 are the nets employed to draw the English Church into 
 the Church of Rome. 
 
 In the novel of " Endymion," Mr. D'Israeli appears under 
 the name of Bertie Tremaine. He is represented as lead- 
 ing the Protectionist party, on its secession from Sir Robert 
 Peel (vol. iii., 157, 158) ; he is said to receive high office in 
 1852, although he had never held office before; and he 
 leads the House of Commons from February to December, 
 1852 (vol. iii., 319-322). All this, it is needless to remark,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 175 
 
 is literally true of Mr. D'Israeli. Compare it with Mr. 
 D'Israeli's reply to Mr. Gladstone's " Ministerial Explana- 
 " tion," in the House of Commons, on March 20, 1873. 
 Bertie Tremaine is represented as saying, " This offer of a 
 " seat in the Council was, perhaps, the beginning of the 
 " end ; it was a crisis ; they must look to seats in the Privy 
 " Council, which, under Sir W. Temple's plan would be 
 " accompanied with Ministerial duties and salaries." Bertie 
 Tremaine's character is also strictly in keeping ; he " had 
 " studied the art of developing character and conversation. 
 " . . . His various knowledge ; his power of speech ; 
 " his eccentric paradoxes ; his pompous rhetoric, relieved 
 " by some happy sarcasm ; and the obvious sense, in all he 
 " said and did, of innate superiority to all his guests, made 
 " these exhibitions extremely amusing " (vol. Hi., 227). He 
 calls himself " that great leader of men " (vol. iii., 223), and 
 informs us that " the heaven-born minister air of the great 
 " leader was striking ; he never smiled, or, at any rate, he 
 "smiled contemptuously" (vol. iii., 108). 
 
 Mr. Tremaine Bertie is represented to us as Bertie Tre- 
 maine's " brother." A brother is either consanguineous, when 
 the same blood runs in his veins, and he bears the same 
 family name ; or else he is fraternal, when the relationship 
 arises from co-membership in the same Society. That 
 Society was called " the Pythagoreans," because they were 
 enjoined silence until they had learned "the art of conver- 
 "sation," in which art all Jesuits excel, and especially that 
 particular one who is depicted, unmistakably, under the 
 name, "Tremaine Bertie." Tremaine Bertie "is a Sybarite, 
 " and has a general contempt for mankind, certainly for 
 " the mob and the middle-class," whom he was in the habit 
 of calling " dogs." He is also made to say, " I believe I 
 "owe my success in no slight measure to the manner in 
 " which I gave my hand when I permitted it to be touched " 
 (vol. iii., 229). That is a trait which is easily recognised by 
 all who knew the real Tremaine Bertie. Tremaine Bertie 
 is described as understanding foreign politics better than
 
 1 76 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 any man, and being " a thorough man of the world " (vol. 
 ii., 12). He wrote in a paper called The Precursor. "Its 
 " style was remarkable never excited or impassioned ; 
 " but frigid, logical, and incisive, and suggesting appalling 
 " revolutions with the calmness with which one would 
 " narrate the ordinary incidents of life." The paper after- 
 wards changed its name to The Privy Council. It was 
 written in the style of Sir W. Temple (who was the model 
 author of a certain Jesuit) ; and the editor was Jawett (or 
 Collett). Tremaine Bertie, we are further told, was the 
 only man who could understand that which was written by 
 Bertie Tremaine. It is perfectly true that Mr. D'Israeli 
 continually announced the doctrines of the Jesuit brother 
 whom he describes ; he did so in sphinx-like and mys- 
 terious words, and in pointed allusions, which were under- 
 stood by the initiated, but were utterly bewildering to the 
 rest of mankind (vol. Hi., 108, 109, 330). Job Thornberry, 
 who " made wonderful speeches in favour of total and im- 
 " mediate repeal of the Corn Laws " (vol. ii., 138), was Mr. 
 Cobden, whom Mr. Bertie Tremaine, being " a landed pro- 
 " prietor," and leader of the Protectionists, desired to secure 
 (vol. iii., 77, 78). 
 
 It would be very easy to unfold all the doctrines pub- 
 lished in those newspapers, The Precursor, and The Privy 
 Council, relative to the partial suppression of the House 
 of Commons, and the substitution for Parliament of the 
 Queen in Council ; but this would be tedious ; and we 
 pass to the opinions of Mr. Gladstone, as quoted in the 
 House of Commons on March 4th, 1879, because they are 
 the same as the opinions of Lord Beaconsfield : " I am 
 " one of those," said Mr. Gladstone, " who think the evils of 
 " our Parliamentary system very great ; and I go so far as to 
 " admit that no extension of the suffrage, wise and right as 
 "it may be, will cure them." In his " Gleanings " (vol. i., p. 
 227), he says : " The Sovereign in England is the symbol 
 "of the nation's unity, and the apex of the social structure 
 " the maker, with advice, of tJte laws, the supreme
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 177 
 
 " governor of the Church," etc. Again (p. 245) : " The 
 " Crown is entitled to make a thousand peers to-day, and 
 " as many to-morrow ; it may dissolve all and every Par- 
 "1 iament before it (the Parliament) proceeds to business; 
 " may pardon the most atrocious crimes ; may declare war 
 " against all the world ; may conclude Treaties involving 
 " unlimited responsibilities, and even vast expenditure, with- 
 " out the consent nay, without the knowledge of Parliament; 
 " and this, not merely in support or development, but in 
 " reversal of policy already known to and sanctioned by 
 " the nation." In such a state of the law Mr. Gladstone 
 sees nothing to cause fear or anxiety. 1 But the present 
 character of our deformed Parliament does inspire him 
 with terror (ibid., p. 168) : "The public liberties are abso- 
 " lutely in the hands of the constituencies. It is not from 
 " the Crown, nor even from the aristocracy, that we have 
 " anything to fear ; but it is upon less conspicuous issues 
 " from subtler and from meaner influences outside them 
 " and from what is within them. . . . The people are, 
 " of necessity, unfit for the rapid multifarious action of the 
 " administrative mind ; unfurnished with the ready, elastic, 
 " and extended, if superficial knowledge, which the work of 
 " Government in this country, beyond all others, demands. 
 " . . . It is written in legible characters and with a pen 
 " of iron, on the rock of human destiny, that, within the 
 
 1 JESUIT EXPECTATIONS. In support of the views of some of your 
 correspondents I cannot do better than recall a conversation I had 
 with a Jesuit missionary priest whilst travelling from London during 
 the month of May, 1883. We had engaged in a rather warm contro- 
 versy on the different dogmas of the Church of Rome, when, just as 
 we were arriving at Derby, he somewhat heatedly exclaimed : " Mark 
 " my words, before ten years elapse, you will have a Catholic king on 
 "the throne of England, and the Mass will be celebrated both in St. 
 " Paul's Cathedral and Westminster Abbey," to which I had just time 
 to reply by way of a parting shot " Before that will take place, we 
 " will call another William of Orange to our aid, and you will have 
 "to fight your way through the blood of the Protestant people of 
 " England." 
 
 THOMAS SMELT. 
 
 I, James's Place, Old Trafford, Manchester. 
 Sept. 17 th, 1885. 
 
 N
 
 178 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " domain of practical politics, the people must be in the main 
 "passive" 
 
 On the 29th April, 1881, Mr. Gladstone, after commend- 
 ing, in highly eulogistic terms, the superior wisdom of our 
 forefathers of " the fourteenth century, or thereabouts," said 
 that in those days Parliament had much more to say in 
 matters of peace and war, and particularly in matters of 
 treaty engagements, than it has now ; " but," he continued, 
 " we must recollect what the Parliament was in those days ; 
 " it was virtually an assembly meeting with closed doors ; 
 " the people of the country were not cognisant in detail, 
 " from day to day, or even from week to week, or month to 
 " month, of the proceedings of Parliament ; and Parliament 
 " could be used by the Crown as a Council, to a consider- 
 " able extent, without incurring the tremendous incon- 
 " venience of disclosing, to the whole world, what you were 
 " about. But . . . the opening of the doors of Par- 
 " liament to the people of this country, and the communi- 
 " cation of its proceedings, from moment to moment, to the 
 " whole world, has disabled Parliament from doing that 
 " which in former times it might justly do, and which it was 
 " habitually, to some extent, called upon to do." 
 
 As will presently appear, the House of Commons has, 
 by various means used by Lord Beaconsfield and Mr. 
 Gladstone, been brought into discredit, with the view of 
 clipping its wings, and taking back its arrogated powers. 
 The most notable of these means was called OBSTRUC- 
 TION. 
 
 No. XXX. 
 
 EVERY politician who is worthy of the name of statesman 
 must have a power of combination. He must be able to 
 combine circumstances, the passions and feelings of men, 
 and adventitious means, so as to attain the end which he 
 has put before himself. He must also be able to keep in 
 view, not only his ultimate end, but all the subordinate
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 179 
 
 ends also, which may be attained by the same action and 
 effort. Thus did Mr. D'Israeli, when he used obstruction, 
 not only to cast the House of Commons into contempt, 
 but also, in the meanwhile, to pass measures which should 
 be useful and beneficial to the Roman Catholic Church. 
 During the passage of the Irish University Bill in 1879, 
 for example, the Irish members assumed a hostile attitude, 
 and spoke of obstructing the progress of the Bill. 1 The 
 Government newspapers, then, at once urged "a timely 
 " concession " in order to save the Bill. The kind of con- 
 cession was also pointed out. The principle of the con- 
 cession was " ready to hand, in the provisions of the Irish 
 " Intermediate Education Act " of the previous year. It 
 pretended to be doubted, indeed, whether such a concession 
 would be sufficient to secure the acceptance of the Irish 
 Roman Catholic party ; but if so, it would be well worth 
 while to give all colleges and schools, and private places of 
 tuition " an indirect endowment by payment of result fees." 
 By means of this obstruction, Parliament was made to 
 accept this " compromise," and was persuaded that it 
 " would be impolitic to discard it " ; because that it would 
 be useless to attempt to pass the University Bill, if it 
 should be opposed by the Irish members. But, while 
 effecting this, the obstruction had the further end of dis- 
 crediting the House of Commons, so that, in time, the 
 people of England might consent to reduce it to the 
 position of a parish vestry, and would be content to divest 
 themselves altogether of representative institutions, in 
 accordance with the syllabus of 1864. 
 
 By the end of July, iS/Q, 2 it had become apparent that 
 this scheme of overcoming Parliament, by means of ob- 
 struction, had met with success : " The Irish Catholics 
 " were to get what they wanted, and the English public 
 " were to be persuaded that ministers were not granting 
 " what they had sworn not to allow." Not only was the 
 enactment of Roman Catholic measures, the one end of 
 1 Times, July 21. z Pall Mall Gazette, July 29.
 
 i So RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 obstruction, thus obtained ; but also the other end, or rather 
 the means itself, had been thereby strengthened for further 
 use, and obstruction had received a new life for further 
 conflicts. " The policy of the Government, both on the 
 "Army Discipline Bill, and on the Irish Education Bill, was 
 " the most conclusive justification which the obstructives 
 "and the Home Rulers could plead." Much had also 
 been effected towards the ultimate end of obstruction, 
 namely, to discredit the House of Commons, and so per- 
 suade the English nation to cast off their ancient represen- 
 tative institutions, and become de facto, what Mr. D' Israeli 
 had made them de jure, by his " Royal Titles Bill," no 
 longer the kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, but, an 
 Empire. Therefore, the pertinent question was persistently 
 asked : " For what conceivable reason does Parliament exist, 
 " meet, discuss and deliberate, if it is to swallow great pro- 
 " positions by the score, without examination ? " The 
 conclusion generally arrived at, was that : "As we have seen, 
 " Her Majesty's ministers are doing their utmost to help, 
 " and themselves to play, the obstructive game." 1 
 
 As was very natural, the Irish priests, as early as Sep- 
 tember, 1878, believed that the Irish Intermediate Education 
 Bill was the result of " the previous action of the ob- 
 " structionists ; and that an Irish University Bill would 
 " spring from the same source, and from a like cause." So 
 wrote to me an Irish Roman Catholic gentleman, who was 
 very conversant with Irish politics. When the obstruction 
 of 1879 had been successful in procuring, for the Irish 
 priests, a satisfactory University Bill, the obstructionists 
 were publicly thanked for it, and secured all the eccle- 
 siastical support at the ensuing elections in 1880; and, as 
 the obstructionists were the extreme Nationalist section 
 of the Irish party, the priests to a man became, de facto, the 
 warm allies of Messrs. Parnell and Co., which the large 
 majority of them were before, on principle. An acute 
 Irish Liberal politician wrote to me : " That, in truth, will 
 1 The World, July 30, 1879.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 181 
 
 " be an indirect support to the Conservative Government ; 
 " the Liberal party cannot now look for any support 
 " from Irish constituencies. . . . The Government of 
 " Lord Beaconsfield have dealt very ingeniously with the 
 " priests. They have taken them into counsel about the 
 "Education Bill;" this was written in 1878 "they 
 " have virtually put into the hands of the Cardinal and the 
 " heads of their colleges, the appointment of the Catholic 
 " commissioners and officials. I am not sure that an 
 " University Bill is not partly suggested in the future." So 
 it was, as the event speedily proved. 
 
 Although obstruction was, before the year 1877, almost 
 unknown to English observers, yet in 1871, Mr. Gladstone 
 spoke at Aberdeen, on the subject of obstruction. He, 
 even then, regarded it as one of the most serious questions 
 of the day ; although it was still in the womb of futurity, or 
 rather, in his own brain, and the bosoms of the Jesuits. His 
 words were : " The question of improving the machinery of 
 " Parliament, with the view to the more effective despatch 
 " of public business, is becoming, more and more, one of 
 " the most serious questions of the day." Mr. Gladstone 
 evidently knew what had been planned ; he was aware of 
 the occult schemes which had been devised ; he had been 
 informed of what was coming, and therefore he could 
 prophesy events which were still in the womb of futurity. 
 It was not until the year 1877 that obstruction properly 
 made its appearance ; and politicians then stared at it with 
 open-mouthed amazement and alarm. The phenomenon 
 was something inexplicable, and hitherto unheard of. " In 
 "the summer of 1877 Parnell and Co. had obtained a far 
 " larger support, especially among the masses, than Butt ; 
 " and the priests looked on, if not approvingly, at least very 
 " complacently at the obstruction." So wrote one of the 
 shrewdest observers of Irish politics. The phlegmatic, 
 apathetic Englishman looked on with wonder ; presently 
 with disgust ; then with irritation ; and finally he set his 
 features with determination. Mr. Gladstone flew to the
 
 1 82 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 assistance of the obstructionists. In an article in the 
 Nineteenth Century, of August, 1879, ne wrote: " To prolong 
 " debate, even by persistent reiteration, on legislative 
 " measures, is not necessarily an outrage, an offence, nor 
 " even an indiscretion ; for, in some cases, it is only by the 
 " use of this instrument that a small minority, with strong 
 "views, can draw adequate attention to those views." 
 Again : " Now, if a great party may obstruct, it is hazardous 
 " to award a narrower discretion to a small one ; for it is 
 " precisely in the class of cases where the party is small, and 
 " the conviction strong, that the best instances of warrant- 
 " able obstruction might be found. . . . When we apply 
 " these tests to the case commonly known as that of a few 
 " Irish members, in connection with the flogging clauses of 
 "the Army Bill, the keenest advocate of penal measures 
 " against them may, perhaps, be led to pause. . . . The 
 " Hcme Rulers of Ireland have, in the main, done good 
 " service to the Government during the present Parliament. 
 " . . . They obtained, last year, a valuable retaining fee 
 " in the Irish Intermediate Schools Act, etc'' Further, Mr. 
 Gladstone wrote, in the same article : " The Home Rulers 
 " have undoubtedly handled the whole measure (Army 
 " Bill) under the influence of an ulterior purpose, latent, yet 
 " not clandestine to prove the incapacity of the House of 
 " Commons for its present work. And it may truly be said 
 " that, in a measure, they have demonstrated this incapacity 
 " by creating it." 
 
 That article, from the distinguished pen of Mr. Gladstone, 
 was clearly an apology for obstruction, as well as an 
 incentive to spur on the Irish Home Rulers, and some 
 Liberal members, to further efforts in the newly discovered 
 path of glory. It was more than this ; it was a distinct 
 announcement that Lord Beaconsfield was as anxious as 
 Mr. Gladstone that the science of obstruction should be 
 further pursued, and brought to perfection ; while the corpus 
 vile of the House of Commons should be vivisected, and 
 sacrificed, in the pursuit of this newly invented science.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 183 
 
 Two days previously to the publication of that article l 
 a step was taken to direct public attention to it, and to 
 insure for it a widely extended effect. A leader a 
 communiqu^ probably appeared in the Times, which 
 made known that, in Mr. Gladstone's opinion, " it is they 
 " (the Government), and not the Home Rulers, who are 
 " responsible for the obstruction of business in the House 
 " of Commons. . . . To accuse the Ministry of raising 
 " the whole Eastern Question out of a virgin soil ; to 
 " describe the questions which have arisen in relation to 
 " Turkey and Egypt as gratuitously raised ; and then to 
 " base, upon this account of affairs, a formal complaint that 
 " the Government are the real obstructives, while the Home 
 " Rulers are very excusable, if not praiseworthy persons : 
 "this is one of those exhibitions which would scarcely 
 " be believed in fiction." This view of Mr. Gladstone may 
 have been ostensibly regarded, by the Times, as fiction ; 
 because the apathetic Englishman who subscribed his 
 pennies for the Times, with his tea and toast, was not as 
 yet prepared to believe otherwise. Those, however, who 
 were behind the scenes in Ireland, knew that Mr. Gladstone 
 wrote the sober truth. Here is one letter : " All the 
 " blame may well be attributed to the Conservative 
 " Government and their Chancellor of the Exchequer 
 " (Sir Stafford Northcote). He might have crushed the 
 " obstructionists, and covered them with contempt ; instead 
 " of which, he, by his weakness, made heroes of them ; and 
 " they returned, having conquered the British Parliament, 
 "as they alleged, to pose as patriots at home." A well- 
 informed French paper, the Constitutionnel, in fact broadly 
 stated, in 1878, that it was the Government who had put 
 up Messrs. Parnell and Co., to carry on a useful obstruc- 
 tion, in order to " educate " the House of Commons into 
 agreeing to that Irish Intermediate Education Bill, 
 which had been suddenly introduced at the very end of 
 the session. 
 
 1 July 30, 1879.
 
 1 84 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 In the early part of the summer of 1875, shortly after the 
 general election, the Irish priests spoke of the difficulties 
 they encountered in the creation of an Irish Catholic party 
 in Parliament difficulties which they did " not regard as 
 " insurmountable." They had, they said, " in accordance 
 " with their history, to sympathise with the aspirations of 
 " the people, and thereby direct and control their action ; " 
 every man, who desired to occupy a prominent place in 
 that party, had, therefore (said they), to take " a National 
 " line of action," and seek for power from the same source 
 " whence the priests derived their power. " But perhaps," 
 (as an agent of theirs wrote to a prominent member of that 
 party), " perhaps you would not subject yourself to the 
 " ordeal necessary to qualify for leadership ? " That ordeal 
 was subsequently explained as : "a preparation for 
 " leadership which, at present, would require a line of 
 " conduct you would recoil from." A Romanist leader, 
 and a purely Romanist party, were not, at first, desired. 
 Because they held that " Catholic interests are always 
 " more materially advanced in the House of Commons by 
 " Protestant advocacy." At first Butt was the leader ; then 
 Parnell ; for the latter did not " recoil from the ordeal " 
 necessary to qualify for leadership ; but went to the United 
 States, and became an adept in the science of obstruction, 
 and many other sciences and arts. 
 
 No. XXXI. 
 
 PREVIOUS to the year 1877 the only symptoms of obstruc- 
 tion were mere preliminary canters in preparation for the 
 great stakes. The obstructionists stretched the muscles of 
 their minds, and made experiments to qualify them for 
 "the ordeal." On the 25th of July, 1877, Mr. Speaker 
 ruled, against the preliminary canters, that : wilful and 
 persistent obstruction was a contempt of the House, and 
 would render the member who practised it liable to " sus-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 185 
 
 " pension from the service of the House, or commitment" 
 On the previous Tuesday, July 3, during the passing of 
 the Army votes, there had been a prolonged sitting, which 
 lasted until 7.30 in the morning. During the debate, 
 Mr. Blake quoted expressions, which had been used by Mr. 
 Parnell at a meeting in the Strand in the preceding April ; 
 and similar expressions, which he had uttered at a meeting 
 on Sunday, June 17, in the schoolroom of the Roman 
 Catholic Church in Hatton Garden. Those expressions 
 plainly showed that obstruction had been carefully planned, 
 and was intentionally resorted to for ulterior purposes. 
 Therefore it was that, on the 25th of July, the Speaker 
 felt himself compelled to make a declaration against ob- 
 struction, fulminating his threats against any member who 
 should practise it in future. On the 3ist of July, the long 
 sitting of twenty-six and a half hours, on the South African 
 Bill, was achieved. It was the first notable achievement of 
 the kind, and occurred not a week after the Speaker's 
 fulminations. After this, the art seemed to flourish under 
 the kind supervision of Mr. Speaker ; for no member was 
 either suspended or committed, and the recorded threat 
 was found to be a brutum fulmen. For example : On 
 July 5, 1879 ft was on a Saturday the House met at 
 1.40 p.m., and sat until 12.15 on Sunday morning, wasting 
 both time and temper over the Army Discipline Bill. 
 When it was perceived that the House had been wearied 
 out and flagged, the Irish University Bill, and the Bill 
 which devoted one million sterling to the Irish Roman 
 Catholic school teachers, were adroitly passed by Mr. 
 D'Israeli's Government. 
 
 At the beginning of the session of 1879 there were loud 
 outcries, throughout the country, against the practice of 
 obstruction ; and several members of weight declared that 
 " unless the House succeeded in putting down the system 
 " of obstruction, to which it had been subjected for three 
 " sessions, it would fall in the estimation of the country " 
 which, indeed, was evidently the ultimate end in view.
 
 1 86 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " The whole credit of Parliamentary government was 
 " involved," they said. 1 " Whose fault it may be we do not 
 " pretend to say ; but the House of Commons, for the 
 " last ten years or more (i.e. since Mr. Gladstone's acces- 
 " sion to office and to the leadership of the Liberal party) 
 " has been sinking in public estimation ; the importance of 
 " the Ministerial Resolutions, great as they undoubtedly 
 " are, sink into insignificance compared with the discredit 
 " into which representative institutions are brought by such 
 " scenes as those of last night." Later in the same year, 
 another influential journal 2 thus delivered its judgment : 
 " No one wished to discredit the English Parliament in 
 " former days. . . . TJiere is too much reason to believe 
 " that this can no longer be said" It was at this period 
 that Mr. Gladstone flew to the rescue, and wrote that 
 article in the Nineteenth Century, which was so favourable 
 to obstruction, and gave so much support and comfort to 
 the obstructors. The outcry in the clubs and newspapers 
 was fast becoming too loud and strong ; and it was neces- 
 sary to calm the excitement, to allay the force of the gale, 
 and lessen the strength of the tide. Mr. Gladstone was 
 ready with his proffered help, and pointed to the real 
 authors of the evil : " If those who have had the main 
 " share in bringing about this state of things are mainly to 
 " bear the brand of obstruction, then, I apprehend, there is 
 " no doubt that at this hour the chief obstructionists are the 
 " Government." The Pall Mall Gazette? with remark- 
 able perspicacity, seemed to throw on both " Liberals 
 " and Conservatives alike " the blame of bringing into 
 " contempt and futility " the English Parliamentary sys- 
 tem ; " menacing the very life of Parliament, and the very 
 " existence of representative government." Sir Stafford 
 Northcote (the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and leader of 
 the House of Commons) was conscious that considerable 
 blame had fallen upon him, and so he openly attacked 
 
 1 Standard, Feb. 21, 1879. 2 Pall Mall Gazette, July 5, 1879. 
 3 September 6, 1879.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 187 
 
 many Liberal delinquents 1 : " But do not be led away 
 " altogether by what you hear ; do not suppose that 
 " obstruction comes from only a few Irish members. The 
 "difficulty is far deeper than that. There are men, who sit 
 "for important English consistencies, WHO SECRETLY, AND 
 " SOMETIMES MORE THAN SECRETLY, favour obstruction, 
 " which bears the name of certain Irish members." Then, 
 after mentioning a sitting which had lasted until seven 
 o'clock in the morning, he continued : " It was not by 
 " Irish members that we were kept up on that occasion ; 
 " but by tJie representatives of great English constituencies, 
 " supported and encouraged by men who sit ON THE FRONT 
 " OPPOSITION BENCHES (i.e. with Mr. Gladstone), or at 
 " least by ONE of them. These things have to be con- 
 " sidered. . . . The difficulty is that there are men 
 " who are not so ready to put down obstruction ; and, if 
 " there is an attempt made to grapple with obstruction, 
 " you are by no means sure of getting support from a 
 " considerable number of men in the House whose support 
 " you ought to have." The men, whose " support you 
 " ought to have," were of course statesmen of considerable 
 weight and standing ; otherwise their denial of support 
 would not have mattered much. 
 
 The late Professor Fawcett retorted on the Chancellor 
 of the Exchequer on October 28, 1879: "In a recent 
 " speech which Sir S. Northcote made at Exeter, he ex- 
 " pressed the opinion that obstruction might be put down 
 " in a quarter of an hour, if Parliament were so minded ; 
 " but if this is his opinion, he is absolutely bound, as leader 
 " of the House, to let us know what is the remedy which 
 " he proposes ; and then throw upon Parliament the re- 
 " sponsibility of accepting it, or rejecting it. Anything 
 "more unfortunate than the way in which obstruction has 
 " hitherto been dealt with, it would be scarcely possible for the 
 " most perverse ingenuity to devise. At one time it was 
 " pretended that a triumph was obtained over it, by mak- 
 1 Times, September 9, 1879.
 
 1 88 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " ing the House of Commons sit continuously for tiventy-six 
 "hours, and pass twenty Bills without examination and 
 " without discussion. Could anything be more likely to lower 
 " tlie autJiority of Parliament than, because of the miscon- 
 " duct of three or four members, who were left untouched, 
 "to bring upon hundreds of thousands of people, whose 
 " interests were affected by these Bills, all the inconve- 
 " nience which results from hasty and careless legislation ? 
 " But, during the last two sessions, the Government, even if 
 " they had intended to encourage obstruction, could hardly 
 " have more effectually done so, than by the course they have 
 " adopted. They have so arranged matters as to produce the 
 " impression that members get rewarded in exact proportion 
 " to the extent to which they impede the business of Parlia- 
 "ment. In the session of 1878, apparently to silence ob- 
 " struction, a million pounds of a fund, with regard to which 
 " a pledge had been given that not a shilling of it should 
 " be devoted to any denominational purpose, was in large 
 "part given as grants to denominational institutions in 
 " Ireland ; and, in making these grants, the important prin- 
 " ciple, which had been maintained with undeviating con- 
 "sistency in England and Scotland, that any institution 
 " which received grants of public money should submit 
 " itself to public inspection, was absolutely set at nought. 
 " The course of proceeding whicli was adopted at the close of 
 " last session, apparently offered a still more direct rezvard to 
 " obstruction. Until quite late in the session, the Govern- 
 " ment never vouchsafed a hint that they intended to deal 
 "with the question of Irish University Education. The 
 " Army Bill was obstructed ; various votes in Supply, 
 " especially the Scotch Education votes, were also ob- 
 " structed. Suddenly all these obstacles to legislation disap- 
 " peared when the Government came down and promised that 
 " an University, which had been founded by Sir R. Peel, 
 " and which had done some of the best educational work 
 " that ever had been done in Ireland, but whose only 
 " offence was that it had made itself, by pursuing a course
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 189 
 
 " of strict religious impartiality, hateful to some zealots, 
 " who found their representatives among the obstructionists 
 " in Parliament, was to be destroyed ; and in its place was 
 " to be set up a new university, whose future character was 
 " undefined, but, towards the support of which, vague but 
 " tempting promises of grants of public money were given." 
 So said the right honourable Professor Fawcett, late Post- 
 master General. 
 
 Lord Hartington went beyond the facts of obstruction, 
 to seek out the final cause of it. He did not see that the 
 ultimate aim of it was to bring the House of Commons 
 into contempt ; but he did perceive a more proximate end, 
 the enactment of Roman Catholic measures for the Irish. 
 During the elections, he said at Chesterfield : l " I say that 
 " I cannot recollect a single measure for the improvement 
 "of the condition of Ireland, which has been brought in 
 " voluntarily by the present Government. Such measures 
 "as have been brought in, have been brought in, in the 
 " middle, or towards the fag end of a session, and have 
 " been forced upon the Government by the system of ob- 
 " struction which is practised by some Irish members, 
 " which the Government professed to denounce, but to which 
 " they have yet given all the justification and excuse in their 
 "power, by yielding to it, and by bringing in, under com- 
 " pulsion, measures they did not begin from a sense of 
 "justice." Lord Hartington was utterly wrong. The 
 Government had prepared those measures in accordance 
 with a programme agreed upon with the Roman Catholic 
 Hierarchy ; and the obstruction was got up to excuse them 
 for bringing forward those measures, and to break down 
 the House of Commons into accepting them. 
 
 I will now digress for a moment from the subject of 
 obstruction by independent members of the House, and 
 ask attention to a species of obstruction or stoppage of 
 inconvenient business by the Prime Minister. I can ex- 
 plain this best by an example. In the year 1875, Cardinal 
 1 Times, April 5, 1880.
 
 190 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Manning asked me one day, how Mr. Newdegate's attempt 
 to pass his " Convent Bill," or Bill to provide for the in- 
 spection of convents, could best be thwarted. My answer, 
 dated July 25, 1875, was as follows: "Your Eminence has 
 " asked me about Newdegate's Convent Bill. There seem 
 " to me to be only two ways of dealing with it the first 
 " good and natural ; the second, only as a last resource. 
 "(i) D'Israeli may say, on Tuesday evening, August 3 
 " (the Bill being down for August 4), that it is most im- 
 " portant to finish Supply, or such and such a Bill, and 
 " then ask for Wednesday, August 4, to do so ; on the 
 "ground that the Private Members' Bills, which are down 
 " for that day, have no chance of passing, and that it would 
 " be only a farce to discuss them : (2) To get every one to 
 " speak who can be persuaded to do so ; and, if the Bill is 
 "not talked out, then to move adjournments and divide 
 " the House, until Newdegate gives way. I know no other 
 "way. If your Grace can get the Prime Minister, Mr. 
 " D'Israeli, to take the first course indicated, it would be 
 "natural and effective, for there is really a deadlock of 
 "business." Now compare that letter with the Votes of 
 the House of Commons two days after (July 27). Mr. W. 
 H. Smith, the Secretary to the Treasury, moved : " That 
 " the Government orders of the day shall have precedence 
 "on Tuesdays and Wednesdays for the remainder of the 
 "session." The 55th entry, on the same votes, stands 
 thus : " Monastic and Conventual Institutions Bill ; order 
 " for second reading on Wednesday, August 4 ; read and 
 " discharged ; Bill withdrawn." There was, however, a 
 refinement in the cruelty practised on Mr. Newdegate. 
 Mr. Smith had given notice that he would make that 
 motion at the evening sitting ; yet he chopped it, unex- 
 pectedly, at the morning sitting. Mr. Holt then made up 
 his mind, in conjunction with Mr. Newdegate, to counter- 
 march the Government. He gave notice of a motion, 
 which appeared first on the list : " Monastic Institutions 
 " (deaths). Address for returns." The third motion on the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 191 
 
 list was given by a member of the Government, Sir Charles 
 Adderley (now Lord Norton), on " Unseaworthy ships." 
 Mr. D'Israeli then gave notice that he would move : " That 
 "the orders of the day subsequent to the Committee of 
 " Supply, be postponed until after the notice of motion 
 "relating to 'Unseaworthy ships.'" Thus Mr. Holt's 
 motion was cut out. On July 29 a letter was written to 
 me by a Jesuit, saying : " It seems to me that Newdegate 
 " has been stumped out in the way you suggested ; but, I 
 " presume, he will die hard." 
 
 The next year, the solemn farce was repeated. On 
 March 27, 1876, notice was given by Sir T. Chambers, the 
 Recorder of London, that on Friday, March 31, on going 
 into Supply, he would move for an inquiry into Monastic 
 and Conventual Institutions. Directly after the notice had 
 been given, Mr. D'Israeli jumped up and said he would 
 .illot Friday, March 31, to the discussion on Mr. Cave's 
 nission to Egypt. Mr. Newdegate had also put down his 
 Bill for discussion on Friday, March 31, so that both Mr. 
 Newdegate's Bill and Sir T. Chambers' motion stood for 
 the same day ; and Mr. D'Israeli killed two birds with one 
 stone. Mr. Newdegate, however, "would die hard." On 
 the notices for August II, 1876, there appears the following 
 entry : " No. 2, Mr. Newdegate, Monastic and Conventual 
 " Institutions." This notice had been on the paper some 
 days when, on August 10, Mr. W. H. Smith moved : " That 
 "the House do adjourn until Wednesday, August 12, at 2 
 " o'clock," and thus Mr. Newdegate was again successfully 
 shelved. Mr. Smith was promoted to the post of First 
 Lord of the Admiralty.
 
 192 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. XXXII. 
 
 REMEMBERING that the aim is to discredit the House of 
 Commons, and get rid of representative institutions, we 
 shall see that even the Bradlaugh election has been 
 pressed into the service, and so handled as to bring the 
 greatest amount of contempt upon the House of Commons. 
 On June 23, 1880, Mr. Labouchere, the colleague of Mr. 
 Bradlaugh, moved to rescind the Resolution of the House, 
 which had been moved, on the previous night, by Sir 
 Hardinge GifFard. By this Resolution, the House had 
 refused to concede, to Mr. Bradlaugh, permission to affirm, 
 instead of swearing ; or rather, it forbade him either to 
 affirm or swear. The rescinding motion of Mr. Labouchere 
 was justly stigmatised, by Mr. Newdegate, as "scarcely 
 "respectful to the House." Mr. Gladstone said: "If the 
 " House should rescind it, it would be with some loss of 
 "dignity, which I know not whether, at some time or other, 
 " it may have to confront. But the mere proposal, at the 
 "present time, and in the present circumstances, inflicts 
 " some disparagement upon the House, so far as that can 
 "be done by a private member." Thus Mr. Gladstone was 
 found to acquiesce in achieving a " loss of dignity " to the 
 House. Mr. Bradlaugh said subsequently: "With respect, 
 " I refuse to obey the orders of the House, which are 
 "against the law." It will be observed that Mr. Brad- 
 laugh appealed to the law as something above the House ; 
 as something which the House had to obey. He denied 
 that the will of the House of Commons was law ; and 
 such a contention, although right and true, was quite in 
 accordance with the opinion of Cardinal Manning and the 
 Roman Catholic party. It does not, however, appear how 
 much further he was acting in accord with them. There- 
 upon the Speaker said : " I have now to appeal to the 
 " House to give authority to the Chair, to compel the exe- 
 "cution of its orders," that is, of orders that were illegal.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 193 
 
 He appealed to the House to put force in the place of 
 law, and might for right Again, Mr. Bradlaugh said : 
 " With submission to you, I say that the order of the 
 " House is against the law ; and I positively refuse to 
 " obey it." The Speaker then said : " Serj can t-at- Arms ! 
 " remove Mr. Bradlaugh below the bar." Mr. Bradlaugh : 
 " I shall submit to the Serjeant-at-Arms removing me 
 " below the bar, and I shall immediately return." After 
 this, Sir Stafford Northcote said : " It is a question whether 
 " the authority of the Chair, and not only the authority of 
 "the Chair, but the authority of the House itself, is to be 
 " supported, or disregarded. . . . It is quite impossible 
 " that we can allow an order of the House to be broken 
 " repeatedly, and the authority of the Speaker, and of the 
 " House itself, challenged over and over again." He, 
 therefore, moved that Mr. Bradlaugh be taken into cus- 
 tody. Mr. Gladstone then said : " Now candour compels 
 " me to admit that I see no other course which could have 
 " been taken by those who are responsible for the decision 
 " of last night (i.e. the Tory Opposition) than the course 
 " which is described in the motion just put to the House. 
 " I cannot, for myself, think it right to attempt to resist 
 " the House ineffectually, at each step, in a consistent effort 
 " to give perfect accomplishment and consummation to the 
 " resolution at which it has arrived. I know not whether 
 "the decision will be disputed; but admitting that it 
 " follows logically and necessarily out of what has already 
 " been done ; and as, moreover, nothing can be more un- 
 " satisfactory to all parties, or more unseemly, than a 
 " prolongation of the scene we have lately witnessed, I can 
 "enter no objection to that motion, considered as being 
 " in reality involved, in its essence, in the previous steps 
 "of the House." 
 
 The motion was carried. Sir Stafford Northcote repaired 
 to his leader and chief, Lord Beaconsfield, who decided 
 that " the authority of the Chair should not be supported," 
 and that the House should suffer " a loss of dignity." The 
 
 O
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 very next day, therefore, Sir Stafford came down to the 
 House and moved that his own resolution, of the previous 
 day, should be at once rescinded ! This too was carried, 
 for the stultification and further disgrace of the House. 
 The succeeding week, Mr. Gladstone moved that Mr. 
 Bradlaugh should be allowed to affirm ; thereby further 
 rescinding the original Resolution of the House, and 
 making the House at once "confront," according to Mr. 
 Gladstone's own words, "some loss of dignity." If Mr. 
 Gladstone had wished Mr. Bradlaugh to sit in the House, 
 there were two courses open to him ; the one involving no 
 loss of dignity to the House ; the other tending to bring 
 the House into contempt ; the former being an alteration 
 of the law, by a Bill ; the latter being a Resolution, by 
 which the House should be made to eat its own words, 
 stultify itself, and tarnish its ancient glory. He chose the 
 latter ; " the course which is at once irregular (as it was 
 "said at the time), unusual, and derogatory to the dignity 
 "of Parliament, is the one selected." 
 
 Moreover, Mr. Gladstone's Resolution went further than 
 a mere rescission of the original Resolution of the House. 
 It provided that the ulcer or running sore in the dignity of 
 Parliament, which he himself had so carefully established, 
 should not be healed ; nor even filmed over and closed ; 
 but should be a constant source of irritation and rotten- 
 ness, to drain away all the vital strength of the Repre- 
 sentative system. By the Resolution, the whole question 
 was remitted to the Law Courts. The Courts of Law 
 were called upon to sit in judgment on the House of 
 Commons. That was the result achieved by a waste of 
 two months of the time of the New Parliament ! 
 
 The Law Courts sat in judgment on that branch of the 
 Legislature. Mr. Bradlaugh appealed ; and the Court of 
 Appeal judged the House of Commons. But that was not 
 the end of it. The sore was still to be probed and 
 irritated during the session of 1881. On the 26th of 
 April, Mr. Bradlaugh presented himself to be sworn ; and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 195 
 
 the Prime Minister being-, apparently, by no means anxious 
 to extricate the House from its dilemma, nor to save it from 
 a " loss of dignity," sat stolidly looking on. Sir Stafford 
 Northcote moved that Mr. Bradlaugh should not be per- 
 mitted to swear ; and his motion was carried, by a majority 
 of thirty-three, in a House of 383 members. Neverthe- 
 less, Mr. Bradlaugh again presented himself to be sworn 
 He declined to withdraw, when ordered by the Speaker to 
 do so. He charged the House of Commons with having 
 acted illegally. Still the Prime Minister sat, stolidly 
 looking, with a sea-green complexion. The Prime Minis- 
 ter was called for, by name ; but he refused to rise. Sir 
 Stafford asked Mr. Gladstone what steps he, as leader of 
 the House, would take to carry out its Resolution ? Mr. 
 Gladstone abjured his functions, and said he would leave 
 it to the adverse majority to get themselves out of the 
 mess, if they could ; or else to flounder, further and further, 
 and get all besmirched and bedraggled with mire. Sir 
 Stafford then moved that Mr. Bradlaugh should be ordered 
 to withdraw ; and this was carried without a division. Mr. 
 Bradlaugh refused to obey the order of the House, 
 declaring it to be " absolutely illegal." The Serjeant-at- 
 Arms removed him ; but escaping at the bar, he returned 
 to the table. Thence he was taken, by two messengers of 
 the House, he exclaiming all the while, and vociferating 
 that it was unlawful, and that he refused to submit to 
 physical force. Five messengers surrounded him, as he 
 paused on the floor of the House for an answer ; and 
 amidst cries for " Gladstone ! Gladstone !" which met 
 with no response from the livid, sea-green man, Sir 
 Stafford Northcote rose, and said he would have been quite 
 ready to move the committal of Mr. Bradlaugh, as he had 
 done before, were it not for " THE VERY EVIDENT FACT 
 "THAT MR. BRADLAUGH WAS ENCOURAGED AND SUP- 
 
 " PORTED BY THE GOVERNMENT." Of course he was, 
 Sir Stafford ! by Mr. Gladstone ; and do you mean to 
 say you do not know why ? Are you unconscious of any 
 " loss of dignity " to the House ?
 
 190 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Then was enacted a wrangle between Sir Stafford and 
 Mr. Gladstone, in which each of them spoke two or three 
 times on the same question, a proceeding utterly contrary 
 to the rules of the House ; and each of them declined to 
 make any motion in support of the authority of the Chair ; 
 so that they were both speaking, when there was no ques- 
 tion before the House ; another matter utterly contrary to 
 the rules of the House. In fact it was a wrangle, and then 
 a hubbub, and then a hurly-burly ; until Mr. Cowen, in 
 his northern accent, and good-humoured, eloquent manner, 
 observed that the House was in a dilemma ; and so he 
 moved the adjournment ; which was agreed to, at a quarter- 
 past two o'clock in the morning. 
 
 Thus did Mr. Gladstone refuse to extricate the House 
 from the slough and morass into which he had led it with 
 his ignis fatuus oratory. He abjured the office of leader, 
 on the plea that he had been placed in a minority ; and 
 then, indignant at being looked upon as taking a sub- 
 ordinate part, as Sir Stafford Northcote seized the flying 
 reins of the unguided team, he answered Sir Stafford with 
 a bouncing rudeness and boorish rusticity, which was in 
 itself an outrage on the House. Lastly, retiring into the 
 tent of Achilles, he remained stolidly glaring, sea-green 
 and passive again, as soon as he had triumphantly wit- 
 nessed the House plunging wildly in a mire of difficulties, 
 from which it could not be extricated without a " loss of 
 " dignity." 
 
 No. XXXIII. 
 
 SHORTLY after the meeting of the House of Commons in 
 1880, as may be seen by the Votes of February 28, Sir 
 Stafford Northcote moved and carried a cumbrous Stand- 
 ing Order, which gave, both to the Speaker and to the 
 Chairman of Committees, full powers to suspend any 
 member whom they should judge to be "disregarding 
 " the authority of the Chair, or abusing the rules of the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 197 
 
 " House by persistently and wilfully obstructing the busi- 
 " ness of the House, or otJierwise" The Speaker's decision 
 might, indeed, be challenged by being put to the vote ; 
 but no amendment, adjournment, or debate, was to be 
 permissible. Mr. A. M. Sullivan had just made a speech 
 on Obstruction, to the electors of Marylebone ; and Mr. 
 Gladstone took this opportunity to express his approval 
 of Mr. Sullivan's speech. He said that Mr. Sullivan " had 
 " thrown considerable light upon the subject, showing that 
 " the inherent tendency to obstruction was not confined to 
 " a particular section of the House, but that it had, in other 
 " days, received the sanction of very high authorities" and 
 even " been rewarded by promotion to very high offices" 
 Verily, Mr. Gladstone thus took the earliest opportunity 
 to give Parliamentary encouragement, and the sanction of 
 his great name, to the obstructionists, and to assure them 
 that, as long as he should enjoy a seat in the House, they 
 need not fear the cumbrous Standing Order of Sir Stafford 
 Northcote. It was, he evidently held, but a loud and 
 prolonged bark, which is always given when no bite is 
 intended. 
 
 On the I4th of June, the obstructionists had sufficiently 
 recovered their terror at the sight of the Order, to hold 
 a grand field-day. Mr. O'Donnell put a question concern- 
 ing the French Ambassador, whom he held to be " not a 
 " good Catholic." He prefaced the question with a long 
 explanation. Mr. Gladstone was then cultivating a French 
 and Russian alliance with England, to the exclusion of 
 Germany and Austria. While Mr. O'Donnell was speak- 
 ing, Mr. Gladstone suddenly jumped up, and moved " that 
 " Mr. O'Donnell be no longer heard." Mr. Gladstone thus 
 lit the fuse, and the House was speedily filled with smoke 
 and inflammatory confusion. Sir Stafford Northcote en- 
 couraged the obstructionists, by styling the motion of 
 Mr. Gladstone " a very serious infringement of the right 
 "of debate." And so it undoubtedly was. He had no 
 right to set the fuse alight The Speaker said that: "A
 
 193 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " motion of that kind had not been made in this House 
 " for 200 years. There were instances of such a motion 
 " having been made in the i/th century." But, Sir Staf- 
 ford ! and you, too, Mr. Speaker ! where is your cumbrous 
 Standing Order that was to effect so much ? Was it only 
 a prolonged bark ? Yes ; while Mr. Gladstone had a seat 
 in the House, there was little fear. 
 
 During the excited and angry debate which ensued, 
 the Home Secretary, Sir William Vernon Harcourt, rose 
 to address the House, in his pungent, sarcastic way. As 
 soon as he had relieved himself of a few preliminary 
 sentences, of a caustic nature, Captain Price moved: "That 
 the Home Secretary be no " longer heard." In this case, 
 however, the Speaker ruled that " the Home Secretary 
 " was in possession of the House " ; a ruling, as was 
 at the time remarked, which had not been held good 
 for Mr. O'Donnell. Sir William thereupon accused the 
 " Opposition of " making discussion in the House im- 
 " possible." Mr. Forster characterized Mr. O'Donnell's 
 speech as " contrary to the decencies of society, an expres- 
 " sion which Mr. Speaker mildly called somewhat strong." 
 Mr. Forster, the Chief Secretary for Ireland, then pleaded 
 that " the honour and reputation of the House were 
 " concerned " ; and he implored the House to "give a 
 " decision irrespective altogether of the rules" which would 
 perhaps not concern the honour and reputation of the 
 House. Moreover, he argued that " the leader of the 
 " House " should always have the power to stop any mem- 
 ber in the course of his speech, and order him to desist. 
 Perhaps he looked on this as an element in " freedom of 
 " debate." Be this as it may, he held that a Prime Minister 
 should be an absolute despot over Parliament a Czar, who 
 should have the power of shutting the mouths of members 
 of Parliament, and securing immunity for his acts, by 
 freeing himself from a too obtrusive and scrutinizing 
 curiosity, on the part of the House of Commons ! 
 
 The Marquis of Hartington set himself, in his steady way,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 199 
 
 to quiet the qualms of his own conscience, in regard to the 
 point that " the liberty of debate may be in some danger." 
 His self-justification was such as the following: "I have 
 " seen, in the course of the last Parliament, irregular con- 
 " duct adopted by the House, on the advice of its leader, 
 " and with the universal assent of the House, under circum- 
 " stances less grave than the present." The example he 
 gave was when Mr. Biggar " availed himself of his privi- 
 " leges, and espied strangers in the House ; and Mr. 
 " D'Israeli, being then leader of the House, irregularly 
 " for he was not in possession of the House and without 
 " notice, got up and moved that strangers be readmitted. 
 " That was an irregular motion that was made ; but it was 
 " carried unanimously by the House. I say, then, that it 
 " is the duty of the leader of the House ... to take 
 " whatever action may be necessary to prevent the degra- 
 " dation of the rules and forms of the House." (Cheers, 
 and cries of " Despotism," " Caesarism," etc.) My Lord 
 Hartington ! you were well described by Seneca when he 
 said : " We take our former acts for law, instead of taking 
 " the law as the guide for our acts." Mr. Courtney ex- 
 pressed his terror, and said the question was " whether 
 " a member was to be suppressed whenever the leader of 
 " the House should invoke that power ? He thought 
 "the only way out of the difficulty, was to vote for 
 " the adjournment of the debate." Mr. O'Shaughnessy 
 perceived that Mr. Gladstone's " precedent was derived 
 "from the infamous reign of Charles II. . . . TJie right 
 " /ton. gentleman sought to destroy tJte privileges of the 
 " House? How remarkably straight you hit, Mr. O'Shaugh- 
 nessy ! Sir Patrick O'Brien was among the prophets, and 
 vaticinated : "If I do not mistake the character of the 
 " British people, they will be the last to look on calmly at 
 " any tampering with the ancient institutions of the House, 
 "even in obedience to the opinions which may be held by 
 "gentlemen at the otJier side of the Channel? Major Nolan 
 averred that " the first step towards crushing a minority
 
 200 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " had now been taken." Mr. Gladstone, hereupon, made 
 a pathetic appeal to Mr. O'Donnell, saying, " It really lies 
 "with the hon. member to relieve the House from its 
 " present position (into which Mr. Gladstone himself had 
 " plunged it). . . . To-day I have to blame myself for 
 " not having explained the main reason which prompted 
 "me to make the motion. I hope some gentleman will 
 " send for the hon. member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell) 
 " whom I still miss from his place. . . . Would it not 
 " be well to give a word of moderating counsel to the hon. 
 " member for Dungarvan ? Let him, for once, conform to 
 " the rules, the orders, the feelings, and the convenience 
 " of the House. Let him only say that he will confine 
 " himself to the giving of a notice for a future day, and so 
 " allow the matter to come to an end ; and there is no one 
 "who will be more glad to ask permission to withdraw the 
 " motion (that Mr. O'Donnell be not heard) than the 
 " person (Mr. Gladstone) who has made it." Sir Stafford 
 Northcote followed in a similar strain ; which he called 
 " adding his appeal." The two front benches were evi- 
 dently terrified at the outspoken exclamations in favour 
 of the liberties and privileges of the House. Mr. 
 O'Donnell then rose, and himself made a long speech on 
 the question " that he be no longer heard." It was the 
 fifth speech that he made in that debate ; and he after- 
 wards spoke many times more. Mr. McCarthy com- 
 plained that " they had an entirely new theory broached 
 " that evening for the conduct of their proceedings. They 
 " had heard of something which was neither the written, 
 " nor the unwritten law of order, but which was a kind 
 " of vague, transcendental law of propriety, a something 
 " floating, as it were, in the air, incapable of any definition ; 
 " imperious, arbitrary, and wholly unfit to afford any sound 
 " or safe advice for the government of their debates. What 
 "rule invested the Prime Minister alone with the power of 
 " silencing a member, by moving that he be not further 
 " heard ? If, on the other hand, that power is extended
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 201 
 
 " to other members, what an effective instrument of ob- 
 " struction it might become ! " 
 
 Sir Stafford Northcote then summed up as follows : " A 
 " gentleman rose in the House to make a speech. It was 
 " admitted that he was in order. But it was considered 
 " that the speech was inconvenient, and one of a character 
 " that ought to be interrupted. The leader of the House 
 " interrupted the speech, and moved that the hon. mem- 
 " ber be not heard. Well, was it to be understood that, in 
 " such circumstances, Mr. Speaker should put the question, 
 " or should exercise a discretion as to whether the speech 
 "was of such a character that it should or should not 
 * be interrupted ? According to all rulings so far, the 
 " matter appeared to be left to the discretion of Mr. 
 "' Speaker." So, Sir Stafford ! the rulings have left it to 
 the discretion of Mr. Speaker ! Whose rulings, I pray ? 
 Mr. Speaker's. Besides, you are co-operating with Mr. 
 Gladstone ! You concede the principle for which Mr. 
 Gladstone contended ! You say that some one should 
 have the power to stop the speech of any and every 
 member ; but you think to beguile the House by changing 
 the venue ! The Speaker shall exercise that power instead 
 of the Prime Minister i No one, not even the King, had 
 such a power in the House of Commons, during the 
 centuries of its existence. But you are co-operating with 
 Mr. Gladstone in introducing a poisonous virus into 
 Parliament. 
 
 After this Mr. Forster pleaded for the right to stop the 
 speech of any member, "as the dignity of the House 
 " would otherwise be at the mercy of any member," He 
 said that the House had been disgraced before "the 
 " country." Yes ; but by whom ? By Mr. Gladstone, 
 who lit the fuse. He asserted also that Mr, O'Donnell's 
 speech "had discredited the House, and would have 
 " disgraced it, if it had been continued." After four or 
 five more speeches from Mr. O'Donnell, scattered through 
 a prolonged and exciting debate, the motion and amend- 
 ment were withdrawn, at two o'clock in the morning.
 
 202 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Yes ; the House had truly been disgraced before the 
 country and discredited. Mr. Gladstone, doubtless, went 
 home with tripping step and buoyant heart, to ponder 
 over his next measure in pursuing the policy of the 
 Stuarts. That night he had achieved much. 
 
 The next measure? Yes; Lord Granville shall take it. 
 He shall send, from the Foreign Office, circulars to all 
 foreign Governments, as well as to our Colonies, to gather 
 arguments and precedents in favour of the imposition of the 
 cloturc. Besides, these circulars will bruit about all over 
 the world that the House of Commons and, indeed, the 
 whole Representative system is an abomination, which has 
 to be got rid of. That is just what we want. Lord Gran- 
 ville did it, on Aug. 25, 1880. King Charles I. and King 
 Charles II. were false-minded Roman Catholics, who pre- 
 tended to be Protestants. Being Roman Catholics, the Re- 
 presentative system was contrary to their principles. King 
 James II. was a professed Jesuit, who vowed obedience to 
 the Jesuit General. James I. had a Roman Catholic wife, 
 and was, perhaps, himself half a Roman Catholic. The 
 distinctive feature in the character of all of them was 
 lying, duplicity, deception. It was their policy to wheedle 
 the kingdom into Romanism, and not by any means to 
 convert it to the Christian faith of the Apostles. Then 
 why did you, Mr. Gladstone, elect to follow the policy of 
 the Charles's in England, and the Tyrconnel policy of 
 James II. in Ireland ? Why do you put all the education 
 in the hands of Jesuits, ruin the landlords, and turn 
 Ireland into one vast camp, with no law in it but the law 
 of the Land League ? We shall see presently how you 
 did all this. In the meantime we shall bear this maxim 
 in mind : that wherever we find duplicity, the hand of God 
 is not in that work, but the hand of the Devil ; and, 
 whenever we find a statesman deceiving the people of 
 England by the publication of false despatches to a 
 British Ambassador in Berlin, such a statesman may be a 
 servant of the Jesuits, but is not doing God's work ; and 
 a curse will undoubtedly, sooner or later, overtake him.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 203 
 
 NO. XXXIV. 
 
 Let us skip over the many minor examples of obstruc- 
 tion, and arrive at the opening of the session of 1881. Just 
 before the meeting of Parliament, there was a general com- 
 plaint in the newspapers that the toleration extended to 
 the Home Rulers, in their conspiracy against Parliamen- 
 tary institutions, had caused a widespread, although, it was 
 hoped, a temporary demoralization. English and Scotch 
 members, it was said, had, during the last session, copied 
 the obstructive tactics of the Irishmen ; so that the elements 
 of disorder and confusion had been on the increase. 1 How 
 little, alas ! such complaints availed ! On the contrary, 
 they fixed the public attention on the matter, and drew 
 down an overwhelming contempt on Parliament. 
 
 Parliament was assembled on January 6, a month earlier 
 than usual, in order to pass an Irish Protection Bill. That 
 measure had been declared Urgent, Yet the debate on 
 the motion for leave to introduce the Bill was again ad- 
 journed as late as Friday, January 28. The debate on that 
 Friday was languid, languishing, and moribund. Mr. Glad- 
 stone rose late in the evening, as if to perform the function 
 of the leader of the House, and close the debate. The de- 
 bate was, however, adjourned. On Saturday morning, the 
 Government printers issued the proposed Bill, although 
 leave had not been given, and so furnished the Irish 
 members with an ample text for renewed debates. Was 
 this accidental ? or was it accidentally intended, in order 
 that obstruction might reach that point which would raise 
 the ire of Englishmen, and so enable Mr. Gladstone to put 
 down the House of Commons altogether ? 
 
 Since the 6th of January, the House had been discussing 
 whether the leave to introduce the Bill should be granted 
 or not ; and on the 29th, the Government, without having 
 obtained the desired leave, nevertheless printed and cir- 
 
 1 See the St. James's Gazette, January 4, 1881.
 
 204 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 culated it among the members, and so furnished a rich 
 pabulum for renewed debates ! Nor was this all. The 
 Bill itself, it was now found, had been so framed as to 
 furnish endless new matters for future debates and obstruc- 
 tions. There was a sub-section in the first clause, which 
 provided that "A list of all persons being detained in prison 
 " under the Act, with a statement opposite each person's 
 " name of the prison in which he is detained for the time 
 " being, and of the ground stated for his arrest in the 
 " warrant under which he is detained, shall be laid before 
 " each House of Parliament, within the first seven days of 
 "every month during which Parliament is sitting." Such 
 a proposal had never before been made. The practice was 
 absolutely new. There was no precedent to authorize it ; 
 and no authority had required it. But, lest there should 
 be any mistake as to the intention of this new invention, 
 the Prime Minister said that it was intended to allow 
 arrests, under this Protection Bill, to be made the subject 
 of Parliamentary discussions ; which, of course, would be 
 inexhaustible in number, and capable of indefinite pro- 
 longation. Mr. Gladstone said that : "" No one can be 
 " arrested under this Bill except upon reasonable suspicion ; 
 " and the reasonableness of the suspicion may be challenged 
 " on the floor of the House." 
 
 On Monday, the 3ist of January, the debate for leave 
 was resumed. It was continued throughout the night, and 
 the next day (February i), and the succeeding night. Mr. 
 Speaker was relieved, in the Chair, by Dr. Playfair. Pre- 
 sently, Mr. Childers called on the Deputy- Speaker to put 
 down the obstruction, promising him the most cordial 
 support on the part of the Government ! Mr. Parnell rose ; 
 and while in the act of addressing the House, he was in- 
 terrupted by Mr. Smith, who remarked that Mr, Parnell 
 had already spoken thirty-three times on the question of 
 adjournment ; was he not, therefore, " abusing the rules " 
 of the House ; and should he not be named to the House, 
 under the cumbrous Standing Order of Sir Stafford North-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 205 
 
 cote, which had never yet been used ? Dr. Playfair better 
 informed of the intentions of the Government than Mr. 
 Childers rose and declared that : " as yet there was no 
 " case of obstruction." Oh ! Dr. Playfair ! what ! No 
 obstruction, when one man spoke thirty-three times on the 
 same question? Hereupon Sir Stafford Northcote abruptly 
 rose and left the House, and the members of the late 
 Ministry, one by one, abruptly rose and left the House, 
 following placidly in the sheep-walk of their bell-wether. 
 Yet Dr. Playfair could not be censured, as he too was 
 merely following in the footsteps of his leader. Mr. Speaker 
 Brand had, before this, been appealed to, in the debate, by 
 Sir Richard Cross, who asked if the Irish members were 
 not combining " wilfully and persistently to obstruct busi- 
 " ness " ? Mr. Speaker solemnly and slowly replied : " Un- 
 " doubtedly ; if members entered into a combination for 
 " the purpose of obstructing business, it would bring them 
 "within the operation of the Standing Order." After a 
 moment's reflection, he added : " Evidence certainly has 
 " been brought before me, during the course of this debate, 
 " of such a combination as would bring members within 
 " the operation of the rule." The Speaker had received 
 testimony of the existence of such a conspiracy as rendered 
 the obstructing members obnoxious to the Standing Order. 
 Why, then, did Mr. Speaker refuse to act, and put the 
 cumbrous Order into operation ? Mr. Childers made an 
 appeal to Dr. Playfair, who had not received any such 
 evidence ; and Dr. Playfair expressed a doubt as to the 
 fact of obstruction. Thus, the obstructionists, who had 
 been promised immunity, received encouragement. 
 
 An Irish member then trailed his coat-tails, with a spiri- 
 tual shillelagh in the clutch of his mind, and called an 
 
 English Liberal member a " fool ! " The latter retorted 
 
 with the words : " Impudent scoundrel! " and the spiritual 
 shillelaghs were mentally flourished. The English member 
 was promptly ordered to withdraw the words and apologise 
 to the offended Irishman. The Englishman did so, and
 
 206 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 asked that the aggressing Irish member should withdraw 
 the displeasing epithet with which he had been designated. 
 But Irishmen had been promised immunity, and they got 
 it. The offending Irishman was not called upon to with- 
 draw the expression, and Dr. Playfair authoritatively de- 
 clared that " the incident was at an end." 
 
 Later on, towards morning, after the second night, 
 another Irish member charged the Chief Secretary for 
 Ireland, who was an Englishman, with having " debauched 
 public opinion, deliberately and intentionally." The De- 
 puty-Speaker on being appealed to, blandly said of the 
 Irishman that the hon. member was wandering away 
 a " leetle from the subject" Sir Patrick O'Brien called 
 the hon. member for Roscommon " a humbug," but was 
 ordered to withdraw the expression, as being "out of 
 " order." The offended member for Rosccmmon was an 
 Irishman. Thereupon Dr. Cummins, another Irish member, 
 spoke, and Sir Patrick averred that he could not hear. Dr. 
 Cummins had his retort ready : " In the present state of 
 "your intellect, you could not understand, if you did hear." 
 
 So the debate went on ; the hoarse, stridulent voices 
 echoing through the hall, until the sweet light of heaven 
 beamed gently in, unobtrusively and quietly, through the 
 painted glass windows of the Commons' room, making the 
 lurid gas, and the ghastly angry faces hideous to look upon. 
 After breakfast, Mr. Gladstone the sea-green immaculate 
 arrived, with other ministers. The late Ministry also stole 
 into their places, along the sheep-walk, as they had before 
 gone out. Then there were earnest whisperings. Eager 
 conferences were held between ministers and ex-ministers. 
 Anxiously one and another went stealthily out, through 
 the glass door behind the Speaker's chair, and anxiously 
 they stole back again. The debate had already lasted 
 forty-one hours. The brave, persistent, indomitable Irish 
 were not up to much more. Nature could not stand it 
 Strength was failing and voices were very husky. Mr. 
 Biggar, the hunchbacked member, was speaking in a voice
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 207 
 
 of calmest suavity, while a broad smile, like a damp sun- 
 beam, struggled to illumine his features. 
 
 Now is the time ! Now or never ! The Speaker enters. 
 Proudly and stiffly the little man came, in order that he 
 might not seem nervous. He mounted the steps of the 
 chair, with firm and heavy tread, amounting almost to 
 tramping ; his little figure erect ; his protruding nose 
 piercing forward into the morning twilight. What is going 
 to happen now ? Regardless of Mr. Biggar, who was 
 perorating suavely, if wildly, Mr. Speaker, in sternest 
 accents, began to tell the House what they already knew, 
 to their cost, concerning the length of the debate. He then 
 added : " A crisis has thus arisen which demands the 
 " prompt interposition of the Chair, and the House. The 
 " usual rules have been proved powerless to insure orderly 
 "and effective debate. . . . The dignity, credit, and 
 " authority of this House are seriously threatened (hear, 
 " hear) and it is necessary that they should be vindicated. 
 ". . . A new and exceptional course is imperatively 
 " demanded," etc. The Speaker then announced that he 
 would at once put the question. He did so, leaving Mr. 
 Biggar to gasp with astonishment in the midst of his 
 speech. There was, of course, a division. Then the Irish 
 members rose in a body, and, like school-boys, shouting 
 " Liberty ! Liberty ! " they filed out of the House. 
 
 The Bill was at once read a first time. The second 
 reading was fixed for noon on that same day two hours 
 later. Mr. Gladstone then rose, and gave notice that : " If 
 " a motion be made that any business is urgent, and if forty 
 " members support it by rising in their places, the Speaker 
 " shall forthwith put the question, without debate, amend- 
 " ment, or adjournment ; and if the question be affirmed 
 " by three-quarters of the members present, the powers of 
 " tJie House for the regulation of business . . . and all 
 " other matters, shall be, and remain with the Speaker." Mr. 
 Gladstone also gave notice that he would move that the 
 state of public business is urgent. Verily, a most excep-
 
 2o8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 tional course! very sweeping, and very stringently coercive, 
 only one degree less so than the Ironside soldier's com- 
 mand : " Take away that bauble." The House truly had 
 the brand of Cain upon its brow. 
 
 On the reassembling of the House at noon, Mr. Labou- 
 chere asked the Speaker under what Standing Order of 
 the House he had acted ? Mr. Speaker Brand replied : 
 ' I acted on my own responsibility, and from my sense of 
 " duty to the House." Let us, for our parts, hope that this 
 was so. But Mr. Parnell wished to move, as a question of 
 privilege, that the Speaker's act was " a breach of the 
 " privileges of the House." Mr, Speaker replied that such 
 a motion was not a question of privilege, and that it could 
 not be done. Mr. Sullivan moved : " That the House 
 " disagrees with Mr. Speaker in his ruling." Mr. Sullivan 
 was told by Mr. Speaker that he (Mr. Sullivan) was dis- 
 regarding the authority of the Chair. Mr. Sullivan then 
 said "he would move the adjournment of the House;" 
 but the Speaker ruled that "he would be entirely out of 
 "order." Mr. Sullivan, however, addressed the House, 
 and said : " A grave constitutional issue has now arisen. 
 " It is a question of the liberties of the House," where- 
 upon Mr. Gladstone appealed to the Speaker: "Whether 
 " those observations were not disorderly ? " Mr. Gladstone 
 afterwards began his reply by saying that motions for ad- 
 journment were "a public nuisance." In such a manner was 
 the whole of Wednesday (Feb. 3) wasted by " urgency " 
 and precipitancy, and the brand of Cain. The Irish Pro- 
 tection Bill was not once touched. Then were heard, on 
 all sides, useless regrets, and indistinct mutterings against 
 the coup d'etat which had been perpetrated by Mr. Speaker 
 Brand, in subserviency to the will of "the People's William." 
 The mass of the members, however, did not care. Perhaps 
 they were glad that lawlessness had been crushed by law- 
 lessness, and disorder quelled by disorderly means. The 
 thraldom which had, for fifteen years or more, been 
 exercised by the party leaders on the members of their
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 209 
 
 respective parties, had caused a secret resentment to 
 smoulder, burn, and glow. To see the destruction of the 
 House of Commons now slaked their thirst for revenge ! 
 
 It was remarked that the Jesuit journal, the Univers, 
 and the Communist organ, the Intmnsigeant, took exactly 
 the same view in commenting on these occurrences ; they 
 took the side of the Irish party. The Jesuit paper did so, 
 no doubt, because it knew or foresaw the downfall of the 
 Representative system ; the latter because the ideas of the 
 Irish members were purely Communistic, Socialistic, and 
 Revolutionary. Two days later, the Univers apologised 
 for this very apparent community of feeling and identity 
 of aims ; and avowed that the sympathy of the Communist 
 organs was an unfortunate thing for the Land League 
 Moreover, in reply to some Bonapartist newspaper, the 
 Univers excused the atrocities of the Land Leaguers, and 
 endeavoured to minimise their crimes. l The Union, the 
 organ of the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Paris, pre- 
 dicted the cloture for the House of Commons and the loss 
 of the privileges and liberties of that ancient assembly, 
 as the net result of the concerted action of the obstruc- 
 tionists. 
 
 On February 3, a gentleman, who had occasion to call 
 on Cardinal Manning, remarked that, " Matters are very 
 " critical ; there is a revolution going on, or, rather, a counter- 
 " revolution ! " The Cardinal smiled. The gentleman 
 then inquired, " I suppose that is the death-wound of the 
 " House of Commons ? " The Cardinal said, in a manner 
 most undisturbed and placid, " I suppose that it is the end 
 " of Parliament" laying stress on the last word. The 
 gentleman remarked that the business had been done 
 " very clumsily." The Cardinal turned on him sharply, and 
 asked him with vivacity, " How would you have done it ? 
 " How could it have been done otherwise? Any motion 
 " would have given rise to endless amendments and pro- 
 " longed debates. The only way was for the Speaker to 
 
 1 Times , January 29 and 31. 
 
 P
 
 2io RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " utter the will of the House, as the mouth-piece of the 
 " House," etc., etc. His vivacity betrayed a kind of parental 
 affection for the scheme. The gentleman replied, " Yes ; 
 " of course, the expressed will of the House ; but he assumed 
 "it." "Yet it was impossible to do otherwise," replied, 
 the Cardinal sharply. The gentleman, after a few moments 
 of reflection, said slowly, " If they know how to deal with 
 " the situation, it will be the salvation of England ; if not, 
 " then it will be the ruin. I mean, that if the House of 
 " Commons returns to its proper functions, and we reinstate 
 
 " the ancient Constitution of England " The Cardinal, 
 
 interrupting, suggested : " Government by the Queen ? " 
 " Yes ; the Queen in Council." " Good ! if you can put 
 " the shadow back two centuries on the dial of Ahaz ! " 
 replied the Cardinal somewhat sarcastically. The gentle- 
 man answered, "I do not believe that the people of 
 " England care for parties ; they want no party \ and are 
 " disgusted with the House of Commons : the shadow has 
 " been put back." After a moment's indecision, the 
 Cardinal said, " Tlie labourers are all ours ; they are with 
 " us ; the skilled artisans will go with Bradlaugh and 
 " Broadhurst, two members that we can count upon ; they 
 " already, you see, support the Government." He then turned 
 away and gazed silently into the fire. 
 
 It will have been remarked that, throughout the long 
 forty-two hours' sitting, the Speaker and the Government 
 refrained from making use of Sir Stafford Northcote's 
 cumbrous Standing Order of the previous February. Not 
 a single member was " named," or " suspended from the 
 " service of the House." A few nay, all the Irish 
 members might have been suspended, before twelve hours 
 of obstructive efforts had been exercised ; and the business 
 of the House would have been satisfactorily accomplished. 
 But then such a course would not have attained the end in 
 view ; it would have done nothing towards impressing the 
 public imagination with the necessity of abolishing the 
 House of Commons. Therefore the sitting was prolonged,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 and the Speaker at first arrogated to himself, and was 
 afterwards invested with, absolute dictatorial powers for 
 stopping debate. 
 
 No. XXXV. 
 
 LET us now compare the diplomatic powers of Lord 
 Beaconsfield with those of Cardinal Manning. On March 
 5, 1 88 1, I met Lord Beaconsfield in Rotten Row, and 
 turned to walk with him. In the course of conversation, 
 I said : " Here is a curious thing : King John for the first 
 "time called Parliament together in 1214 A.D. ; that is, 
 " he summoned the barons and the knights of the shires. 
 "They met in 1215, and he lost his crown I mean the 
 "material thing so that his successor, Henry III., had to 
 "be crowned with a plain rim of gold. The House of 
 "Commons has received its death-thrust now, in 1881 ; so 
 " that it has lasted just 666 years." Lord Beaconsfield's 
 face, on which I kept my eyes fixed, gradually assumed a 
 remarkable expression ; but his answer a " sound most 
 " brutish," as Home Tooke would have said shall be left 
 to the reader's imagination. Five days afterwards I met 
 an old permanent official of high standing, and remarked 
 to him that the House of Commons had been mortally 
 wounded ; and that Gladstone's Government had brought 
 about its death with a most wonderful rapidity with a 
 much greater rapidity than I had expected beforehand. 
 The permanent official answered, "Yes, it is true; the 
 " House of Commons is done for ; but it is a mistake 
 "to suppose that the killing has been done during this 
 " session ; it began two years ago on the Army Discipline 
 "Bill (i.e. in 1879, under Lord Beaconsfield) ; we have had 
 " no Parliamentary Government since then ; the House of 
 " Commons was then stabbed to death." He is a pleasant, 
 jovial man, that permanent official ; and, after a few 
 minutes of silence, he began to bemoan the fate of the
 
 212 
 
 House, saying that it was " the best of Governments, and, 
 " with all its faults, the maker of the best code of laws for 
 " England, or any other country." 
 
 At the beginning of February, 1881, even after the 
 forty-two hours' sitting, the public imagination was not 
 sufficiently inflamed against the House of Commons. The 
 public was decidedly torpid. Michael Davitt was, there- 
 fore, arrested on February 4. When this fact was made 
 known, the agents of obstruction entered upon a more 
 violent and impressive melo-dramatic scene. Sir W. 
 Harcourt refused to answer a question of Mr. Parnell's ; 
 and the Speaker at once called on Mr. Gladstone to make 
 some motion. Mr. Dillon rose to a question of order, 
 and refused to resume his seat, when commanded to do 
 so by Mr. Speaker. The Speaker then, for the first time, 
 resorted to Sir Stafford Northcote's Standing Order of 
 the preceding February, and " named " Mr. Dillon to the 
 House. Mr. Dillon was suspended, and was removed by 
 the Serjeant-at-Arms, assisted by five messengers. Mr. 
 Gladstone and Mr. Sullivan then addressed the House 
 simultaneously ; or, perhaps, alternately, with a systole- 
 diastole, pulsatory movement ; while the O'Donoghue 
 moved the adjournment of the House ; and Mr. Parnell 
 moved that Mr. Gladstone " be no longer heard." A scene 
 of the most " indescribable confusion " ensued. A momen- 
 tary lull was taken advantage of by Mr. Gladstone ; and 
 he, a second time, uttered the first sentence of his still- 
 born speech : " The duty which I have to perform is 
 
 "undoubtedly a matter of vast importance " Again 
 
 Mr. Parnell moved that he " be no longer heard," a 
 motion which seemed superfluous, as the noise made it 
 impossible that any one should be heard. Mr. Parnell was 
 then named and suspended. The Speaker ordered the 
 House to be cleared for a division ; but the Irish members 
 refused to move. The division was, therefore, obligingly 
 taken, while they sat and looked on calmly, as if they 
 were witnessing a burlesque or extravaganza, from the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 21.3 
 
 amphitheatre stalls of the " Folly Theatre." Mr. Parnell 
 was removed by the Serjeant-at-Arms and five messengers; 
 while the Irish members " rose to a man, and waved their 
 "hats above their heads." Again Mr. Gladstone was on 
 his legs, in all the labour-pains of his still-born speech. 
 He said, " I do my best to resume the unfortunate sentence 
 " that has been bisected and trisected. The duty which I 
 "have to perform is undoubtedly a matter of vast im- 
 
 "portance " At once Mr. Finnigan moved "that he 
 
 "be no longer heard." Mr. Finnigan was named and 
 suspended. Again the House was cleared for a division ; 
 and again the Irish members calmly remained in their 
 seats, and refused to move. The Serjeant-at-Arms and 
 five messengers removed Mr. Finnigan ; while the Irish 
 members cheered him too. The unfortunate Prime Minis- 
 ter rose again : " The duty which I have to perform is 
 
 " undoubtedly a matter of vast importance " The 
 
 Speaker gaining courage, or else growing tired of naming 
 individual members, discovered that Sir Stafford North- 
 cote's Standing Order enabled him to name them " in the 
 " gross ; " he therefore named : " Mr. Barry, Mr. Biggar, 
 " Mr. Byrne, Mr. W. Corbet, Mr. Daly, Mr. Dawson, Mr. 
 "Gill, Mr. Gray, Mr. Healy, Mr. Lalor, Mr. Leahy, Mr. 
 " Leamy, Mr. McCarthy, Mr. McCoan, Mr. Mahullum- 
 "Marum, Mr. Metge, Mr. Nelson, Mr. A. O'Connor, Mr. 
 " T. P. O'Connor, the O'Donoghue, the O'Gorman Mahon, 
 " Mr. O'Sullivan, Mr. O'Connor Power, Mr. Redmond, Mr. 
 " Sexton, Mr. Smithwick, Mr. A. M. Sullivan, and Mr. T. 
 "D. Sullivan." In the strictest alphabetical order they 
 were named. Mr. Gladstone moved that all those gentle- 
 men in the lump (naming them in strict alphabetical order) 
 should be suspended under the Standing Order of Feb- 
 ruary 28, 1880. Mr. A. Balfour, of the " Fourth Party," 
 rose to order, and expressed his doubts whether they could 
 be dealt with by the couple of dozen (or rather twenty- 
 eight) ; he thought that, by the Standing Order, they must 
 be dealt with individually. The Speaker exclaimed, " It
 
 214 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " is a question, not of order, but of convenience." Mr. 
 Gorst, of the " Fourth Party," and Mr. Covven repeated 
 Mr. Balfour's protest, and were treated, by Mr. Speaker, 
 with scant courtesy, and silence. The above-named 
 members were then severally taken out, alphabetically, 
 of course, by the Serjeant-at-Arms and five messengers. 
 They could not be taken out by the gross. When that 
 had been accomplished, Mr. Gladstone was again seized 
 ' with the labour-pains of his still-born speech : "1 do my 
 " best to resume the unfortunate sentence ; the duty which 
 " I have to perform is undoubtedly a matter of vast im- 
 
 " portance " Doomed, alas ! to be not only bisected, 
 
 and trisected, and quartered, but pentagonalitomated too ! 
 for Mr. O'Donnell moved : "That he be no longer heard." 
 So Mr. O'Donnell was suspended, and removed by the 
 Serjeant-at-Arms and five messengers. Mr. Richard 
 Power, and then Mr. O'Shaughnessy shared the same 
 unhappy fate. The House had swallowed the nauseous 
 draught, which had been prepared for it by Mr. Gladstone ; 
 it had suffered its gripes and bowel pains ; and had been 
 put to a complete and effective purgation of the offending 
 Irish members. But what was the still-born child ? The 
 " Business of the House " was still-born. The " New Rules 
 " of Debate " were passed with a fatal haste. 
 
 Across the Straits of Dover, all the newspapers arose, 
 and sang a chorus of jubilation, and blessed the Speaker 
 and Government for their exhibition of force against the 
 obstructionists ; while both the Jesuit and Communist 
 journals still continued to take the part of the Irish Land 
 Leaguers. 1 The Republican papers hinted that the freedom 
 of speech, on which we English used to pride ourselves, 
 had, perhaps, been a little rudely brushed away ; and that 
 the liberties of Parliament seemed to have become evan- 
 escent. Yes ; there was no denying it ; the deed had 
 verily been done. The Home Rulers had stood manfully 
 to their work ; they had played their parts most sturdily ; 
 1 Times, February 7, II, 16, etc., 1881.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 215 
 
 and Mr. Gladstone had most deftly enacted his. The 
 players had fumed and strutted awhile upon their stage 
 and fretted in well simulated earnestness. The curtain 
 now fell, and all went home. 
 
 The Times, on the following morning (February 8), was 
 surprised that " it was not the intention of the Home Rule 
 " members to raise any question, or enter any protest 
 " whatever, with regard to the new rules of debate, which 
 " had been carried during their absence from the House of 
 " Commons on Thursday night. TJtey are content, they say, 
 " to leave the matter entirely in the hands of Mr. Gladstone^ 
 Of course they were ! We learned, too, that, in England, 
 the newspapers ascribed the Speaker's and Dr. Playfair's 
 inaction, during the forty-two hours' sitting, " to quit ; 
 " other causes than that of personal weakness or indecision, 
 ". . . It is difficult, in short, to resist the belief that inde- 
 " cision had, in neitfier case, anything to do with the matter ; 
 " that the standing orders were not left un enforced from any 
 " hesitancy in dealing with obstruction, but with a settled 
 " determination to deal with it in another way : that both 
 "the Speaker and Deputy- Speaker allowed the mischief to 
 " continue, after they might have suppressed it, in order that 
 " occasion might ripen for what was to follow ; and that, in 
 " fact, Mr. Brand, like other Napoleonic persons, permitted 
 " anarchy to come to a head, in order that he might then 
 " step in, and save society. He has, as we have seen, been 
 " already congratulated on having allowed rope enough to 
 " the obstructionists ; though the congratulations take in- 
 " sufficient account of the fact that, when the obstruc- 
 " tionists hung themselves, THE LIBERTIES OF PARLIAMENT. 
 " WERE SUSPENDED ALSO." * Both Mr. Speaker and the 
 Deputy- Speaker were made G.C.B. ; and the former has 
 since received the guerdon of a peerage, by the title of 
 Viscount Hampden ! 
 
 The Speaker, enjoying the absolute powers which he had 
 seized, and which were afterwards confirmed to him, pro- 
 1 St. Jamefs Gazette, February 9, 1881.
 
 2i6 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 mulgated, on February 17, the new rules of debate, which 
 still further revolutionized the ancient practice of the 
 House of Commons. As he resumed his seat, after ver- 
 bally issuing his decree, the murmurs were long, loud, and 
 menacing. There was no mistaking the sensation he had 
 produced. He had evidently gone too far. The House 
 was becoming suspicious and irritated. Words were over- 
 heard about the loss of liberty of speech ; that which is so 
 essential to the life of Parliament, having been ruthlessly, 
 and with a high hand, taken away. Some struck nearer 
 at the secret aim of the Government ; and it was said that 
 such practical despotism was not compatible with party 
 government. "There is the end of party government," 
 murmured some, whose only idea of good government is 
 government by party. Those who regarded the government 
 of the Sovereign in Council as the only good government, 
 knew that only the resuscitation of the functions of the 
 Privy Council would really be the end of party govern- 
 ment. 
 
 The Speaker's new rules were "stringent" ; l "they es- 
 tablished the cloture, on the committee stage of a Bill, 
 "in its most naked form." A motion, which had to be 
 voted without debate, might direct the chairman to report 
 a Bill, finished or unfinished, as soon as a certain hour 
 should have struck. Another rule forbad the debate of 
 new clauses and of amendments ; only the member who 
 moved them, and the member in charge of the Bill, might 
 address the House. The Times, next morning, moaned and 
 whined out unavailing regrets : " It is distressing enough 
 "that the House of Commons should be constrained to 
 " sanction cumulative restrictions on its traditional freedom 
 " of debate, and to suspend rules which centuries of free 
 "discussion have tested and approved." This was not a 
 fortnight from the time when the Speaker, without a 
 shadow of right, took upon himself presumptuously to stop 
 a debate, and destroy the liberties of Parliament ; and 
 1 Times, February 18, 1881.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 217 
 
 members began to ask themselves why it was done? Was 
 it to save a few nights of debate on a Coercion Bill ? 
 Those arbitrary proceedings lost many more nights, and 
 much more temper, than would have been expended over 
 anything else. Would such a saving, even, have been a 
 sufficient ground for executing the coup cTttat a fortnight 
 before, and imposing the severe gagging rules now? 
 Better indeed (said many) to lose a month in debate than 
 to sacrifice the whole liberties of England by the debate. 
 
 The leader of the Home Rule party, who had succeeded 
 Mr. Butt, namely Mr. Shaw, contributed his quota of in- 
 formation, in a letter to the Times (February 18). He 
 told us how carefully the Irish party had been prepared 
 for the role it was destined to play, in the conspiracy 
 against the freedom of Parliament, and against the whole 
 representative system. " At a meeting of the party in 
 " Dublin, before the commencement of the present session, 
 " resolutions were passed, without notice, completely alter- 
 ing its constitution, and placing in the hands of a com- 
 " mittee, nominated entirely from one section, the power 
 "of shaping its policy and action. A policy of extreme 
 " obstruction was ostentatiously announced both before and 
 " at the meeting of Parliament. ... On that memor- 
 " able Thursday evening, no words can convey to you the 
 "feeling of humiliation and hopelessness with which I 
 "withdrew from the distressing scene. My first strong 
 "feeling was never to enter the House again. . . . 
 " This policy is directly chargeable with . . . having 
 41 rendered necessary the introduction of rules narrowing the 
 " freedom of Parliamentary debate ; and I cannot under- 
 " stand how any one out of his political babyhood could 
 " have expected any other results." Of course not. Those 
 results were intended.
 
 218 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. XXXVI. 
 
 THE suspicions which had been aroused, and the irritation 
 which had been engendered among the members of the 
 House, by these new rules of debate, were very general. 
 The Government had evidently been too rash and preci- 
 pitate in pressing forward to their end. A new lead, in 
 another direction, was therefore imperative, in order for a 
 time to calm their -feelings. A meeting of Conservative 
 members was hasnfy called at the Carlton Club, to con- 
 sider whether the party should support Mr. Gladstone's 
 resolutions. Of course, the general indignation had to 
 be directed against something. Jonah had to be thrown 
 overboard, in order to save the ship and cargo. It was 
 whispered that "the third rule was, perhaps, unnecessarily 
 " stringent ; " that is to say, " it was somewhat harsh that, 
 "at the fated hour, all further amendments and notices 
 " should be utterly quashed ; let them be put to the House 
 "without debate ; it would take very little time to do so ; 
 "and if Mr. Speaker were requested he might perhaps 
 " agree to this little concession." So the Opposition came 
 to the aid of the Government by proposing a slight con- 
 cession in order to save the rest of the new rules ; or 
 rather, a slight diminution in the amount of wrong to be 
 done, in the hopes that the House would be stupid enough 
 not to resist the perpetration of the wrong altogether. An 
 insidious concession ! a most deceptive diminution, as soon 
 appeared ! Little time was then lost in voting upon the 
 remaining amendments. But something else was lost 
 the power of moving and debating those or similar amend- 
 ments at a later stage. 
 
 Only 1 20 members attended the Conservative meeting. 
 Sir Stafford Northcote presided; and, in his opening 
 speech, he utterly ignored the loss of the liberties of Parlia- 
 ment. He led the attention of the meeting off to collateral 
 issues. " He saw in the rules two most important points,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 219 
 
 " which were likely to prove dangerous. One was, that a 
 "Bill might be reported to the House without most im- 
 "portant amendments being discussed. This was a very 
 " serious and dangerous innovation. The second dangerous 
 " point was where it was proposed to declare that only one 
 "person should be allowed to speak to an amendment 
 "besides the member in charge of the Bill. This would 
 " entirely cut out the Conservative party from saying any- 
 " thing in the debate." Mr. Beresford Hope urged that " it 
 " was better to suffer a little delay than to sacrifice Parlia- 
 " mentary freedom." But it was finally arranged that " an 
 " appeal should be made to tJte Speaker to modify the rules ! " x 
 This, accordingly, Sir Stafford did, at the next meeting of 
 the House. It was not said whether he did so in humble 
 and suppliant posture, kneeling on both knees, at the bar 
 of the House. He began thus : " Sir ! I desire, with your 
 "permission, to put a question to you." He then, in 
 courteous and hesitating phrase, mentioned the two side 
 issues, and humbly added : " I wish respectfully to ask you, 
 " sir, whether it will be possible to remove them wholly or 
 " partially. I do not wish, sir, to press you inconveniently 
 " to give an answer at the present moment." The Speaker, 
 however, did reply at once: "The points brought under 
 " my notice by the right hon. gentleman have not escaped 
 " my attention ; and the House will readily believe that I 
 "have, for many days, given my most anxious attention to 
 " the framing of these rules ; " and on that ground he de- 
 ferred giving any answer until the next day. As those 
 very points, about which he was supplicated, had engaged 
 his anxious attention for many days before he promulgated 
 his decree, therefore he could not be expected to give them 
 up all at once. At two o'clock in the morning, however 
 which was, indeed, the next day, when all honest folk 
 were in bed the Speaker issued an amended decree or 
 rule, conceding only the first of Sir Stafford's side issues. 
 Lord Hartington then, at once, gave notice of "urgency" 
 1 Times, Feb. 19, 1881.
 
 220 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 for Monday afternoon, and named twelve o'clock on 
 Monday night, as the dread hour at which the Committee 
 on the Bill under discussion must come to an end, under 
 the new rule. 
 
 It must be remarked that those exceedingly stringent 
 rules had been issued by the Speaker after anxious and 
 careful consideration. He could not have mistaken the 
 point at which he was aiming ; he had merely miscalculated 
 the temper of the House with which he had to deal. The 
 relaxation was, therefore, not made for the preservation of 
 some of the liberties of the House; it was to act as a 
 soporific or anodyne, and lull the members into an un- 
 guarded slumber, until a more convenient opportunity 
 should arise for strangling their liberties altogether. It 
 must also be observed that, directly the rules had been 
 promulgated, the Government gave notice that they would 
 lose no time in enforcing them and that, too, without 
 affording the House any time for their consideration, and 
 no opportunity for their amendment. Yet surely Mr. 
 Gladstone, if lie was truly a Liberal minister, must have 
 held that the liberties of the House were worth preserving ? 
 If he was, as he called himself, a Liberal leader, he must 
 have set some value on the Representative system ? He 
 must have regarded the House of Commons as a proper 
 legislative machine? Yet here we find him sacrificing the 
 legislative machine, under the paltry pretence of saving a 
 paltrier piece of legislation ! He kicked over the slow 
 work of centuries, under the cloak of carrying out the 
 ephemeral policy of a Cabinet ! 
 
 The Committee on the Bill having, by the new rules, 
 been brought violently to an end, Mr. Gladstone, on Feb. 
 23, brought, in a similar manner, the debate on the Report 
 to an abrupt termination. It was finished at 7 p.m. ; and 
 he at once commenced the Third Reading. We must, 
 however, stop to remark that, before the debate on the 
 Report had been brought to an end, the speeches of several 
 members were summarily cut short by Mr. Speaker
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 221 
 
 Brand : " The hon. member is using the same arguments, 
 " in almost the same language, as on a former occasion ; I 
 "must call upon him to desist." Another member was 
 squelched by being told that he was " wandering from the 
 " question." Another time Mr. Speaker Brand " interposed, 
 "and ruled that the hon. member was using wearisome 
 " iteration, and he called upon him to resume his seat." 
 Again, "the Speaker ruled that Mr. Redmond's amend- 
 " ment should not be put, as it related to prison rules, 
 " which may not be further discussed." 
 
 When the Third Reading had been reached, every one 
 laboured under the distressing sense that the Speaker's 
 absolute power, under " the rules of urgency," in virtue of 
 which he could decide when a debate should be closed, 
 was the sword of Damocles suspended by a hair, in con- 
 tinual menace, over the House. 
 
 The next day (Feb. 24) the organ of the Government, 
 the Daily Nezvs, announced that, " if obstruction be resorted 
 " to on the Army Estimates, immediate steps will be taken 
 "to bring into operation the orders as to urgency." The 
 meaning was, not merely that the immemorial right of 
 presenting grievances before granting a supply, should be 
 taken away ; but also that the control of the House over 
 the public expenditure should be abolished. The votes 
 were not to be questioned nor discussed ! Truly that was 
 a total destruction of the functions of Parliament ! It was 
 excused and covered merely by a pretended rumour that 
 the Irish members would offer obstruction on the Esti- 
 mates ! Would it not be better in such a case, think you 
 to suspend again each obstructing member for a day, or a 
 week, or a month, or a year, if need be, rather than destroy 
 the very functions of the House of Commons ? To dis- 
 franchise the whole of Ireland would seem, to many persons, 
 a lesser evil than to take from Parliament its very source 
 of liberty, and to ask the House of Commons to abandon 
 its first duty to the nation. It might reasonably have been 
 urged that a House of Commons is not a good legislative
 
 222 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 machine, and that it undoubtedly should not interfere with 
 executive functions. It might have been said that it is the 
 wisest who should govern, in every society ; that the wisest 
 are the few ; and that the majority of the House, who 
 really legislate, are not the wisest; that, in each con- 
 stituency, the majority are not the most competent, even 
 to choose the wisest representative ; and that it is much 
 more rational to suppose that the Sovereign could, and 
 would, select the wisest to help and advise her ; that what 
 the constituencies the people can do well is this : they 
 can choose out those who will represent the grievances of 
 their fellows and the wants of their localities. Those were 
 the old Tory arguments ; and those arguments would have 
 had, at least, a show of reason. But they would have been 
 wide of the mark. The point was this : it is always the 
 right of the constituencies to watch, through their repre- 
 sentatives, the expenditure of the money they supply. 
 The discussion of votes in Supply is, therefore, the essential 
 of every representative assembly ; and it was that essential 
 which Mr. Gladstone took away. The Times wrote leading 
 articles to prepare the public mind for this further coup 
 d'etat : " It is only too probable that the House of 
 " Commons will be called upon to repeat the sacrifices it 
 " has already made, not without reluctance and misgiving. 
 "Without the application of the rules of urgency, it seems 
 " almost idle to look for the despatch of any public business 
 " whatever. . . . To-day, for instance, Supply has been 
 "put down as the first order of the day, in order that Mr. 
 "Childers may make a most important statement, etc. 
 ". . . The difficulty is in the application of urgency to 
 " such business as that of the Estimates, upon which every 
 "one desires that there should be no suppression of fair 
 "discussion. But some solution must be found, unless 
 " Parliament is to acquiesce not only in defeat, but dis- 
 " credit." l The Standard, also, which was said to have 
 been the organ or property of an extreme Radical member 
 1 Times, Feb. 28.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 223 
 
 in a high official position in the Government, announced 
 that : " It is understood that the Government intend to ask 
 " the House of Commons to vote urgency on the Estimates. 
 " Should this course be adopted, the analogy of the New 
 " Rules, operating last week, will be followed ; and the 
 " Speaker will apply, to each vote on the Estimates, the 
 " same treatment that he has ordered shall be applied to 
 "the amendments of a Bill in committee. The effect of 
 " this arrangement would be, that after a certain time, the 
 " Speaker or the Deputy-Speaker would put to the House, 
 "forthwith, all the votes not yet passed, and that they 
 " would be divided upon without discussion" That meant 
 that the House should not be allowed to ask inconvenient 
 questions regarding the expenditure, nor press for incon- 
 venient answers, nor investigate, scrutinize, and control the 
 expenditure of the country ; but should be allowed only to 
 divide ! Now, every one knows how divisions are manipu- 
 lated. It is easy for the party in power to have its 
 devoted adherents and obedient slaves at its beck and bid, 
 on every division ; while independent members rarely hang 
 together, and are often absent. Moreover, the " finders," 
 of the party in power, spy out the thoughts and intentions 
 of each member, and know long beforehand how he will 
 vote. Those observations are all reported and tabulated. 
 Besides, the majority are kept straight, either by the 
 whip-hand which the Government possesses, in the secret 
 knowledge of some crime undetected, or some dirty trans- 
 action into which the " useful " or " talented member " has 
 been purposely led ; or else by the little rewards the gew- 
 gaws of political life the decorations, the invitations to a 
 great man's table, or a Queen's ball, the suggested hope 
 of a small colonial appointment, or even some vague and 
 empty expressions like pirate's promises, dangled before 
 the greedy mental eyes and the fervid imaginations of the 
 expectant but inexperienced senator. Party government 
 is based on crime and corruption. 
 
 Men's minds being now in a state of tension ; undefined
 
 224 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 suspicions assailing the older members, and stupid fear 
 unmanning the younger, it became necessary to apply a 
 sedative. On the ist of March, 1881, there was, therefore, 
 a quasi-official article in the Times : " It is intimated that, 
 " though the Arms Bill will retain its precedence whenever 
 ' the Government choose to press it, and though it will be 
 ' dealt with, whenever so pressed, as a matter of urgency, 
 ' some sittings of the House will be taken for Supply from 
 " time to time. The business in Siipply will not be treated as 
 " urgent, unless and until the House shall specially vote it to 
 " be so. We have, therefore, a situation before us which is, 
 " at any rate, anomalous. A measure, for which priority 
 "and urgency have been secured, is to make way for 
 "ordinary business, when the Government think fit to put 
 " it aside. It follows, as a matter of course, that the Arms 
 " Bill will be taken on private members' days, when the 
 " Government cannot ask the House to take Supply ; but 
 "that, when the Government have the power to do so, 
 " Supply will be given precedence." There was, moreover, 
 a hint that those votes in Supply which the Government 
 did not think fit to postpone, should be included in the 
 vote of " urgency." The Times added : " The force of 
 " Lord Hartington's argument is incontestable; but it seems 
 " to point to the necessity for declaring Supply to be 
 " matter of urgency." If an argument is incontestable, the 
 conclusion it points to must undoubtedly be true. He, the 
 semi-inspired, took it upon himself to assert that Lord 
 Hartington's argument was incontestable ; and, it added, 
 that it proved Supply to be declared urgent ; or, in other 
 words, that the House of Commons should vote upon 
 Supply in a submissive and unquestioning manner ! Nor 
 was the Times alone. The same " was stated with the air 
 " of official inspiration in various quarters, and the state- 
 " ment has been officially countenanced." 1 
 
 Those announcements were received with alarm and 
 irritation. The House of Commons was in no mood to 
 1 St. James's Gazette, March i, 1881.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 225 
 
 stand any further demand for the surrender of their ancient 
 privileges any further abrogation of their primary duties. 
 The Government reluctantly, therefore, yes, reluctantly, 
 but only because they could not help it saw that they 
 must drop their last proposal. Mr. Gladstone, indeed, 
 uttered a long and piteous wail about the absolute necessity 
 of passing a number of votes before the 2ist of March; 
 while a number of those intervening days must be devoted 
 to the Irish Arms Bill. The Irish Arms Bill ! Why, how 
 is this ? Is that Bill again to be brought to the fore ? The 
 Government had relinquished it a few days before ; they 
 said it was not urgent ; not even at all necessary ! Why 
 then is it to be furbished up, and brought into the House, 
 and flourished in our faces ? Merely in order to consume 
 the twenty-one days, and persuade the House of the 
 necessity of making Supply become urgent. Merely to 
 create obstruction, and furnish occasion for it. Merely to 
 irritate the Irish members into obstructing both the Arms 
 Bill and Supply, and to anger the House by means of 
 the obstruction, so that they may surrender the last of the 
 privileges of Parliament, as the price of being ridded of 
 obstruction. Parliament is to become like one who would 
 commit suicide in order to get rid of a stomach ache ! 
 
 The Fates were, however, not propitious to Mr. Glad- 
 stone. Sir Stafford Northcote had been Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer. Here was so good an opportunity to remind 
 the House of the fact, and flaunt his financial acumen in 
 their faces. So he showed, incontestably, that there was 
 plenty of time, and not the least need for urgency in 
 Supply. Mr. Gladstone held his peace. But, on the 7th 
 of March, a devoted adherent asked a convenient question, 
 and pressed the Government to devise some plan for the 
 better despatch of business. Mr. Gladstone replied : " It 
 " has been intimated in various forms, and at various times, 
 " that the present state of the House, in reference to the 
 "effective despatch of business, is an extremely serious 
 " subject ; and that, therefore, whether by discussion in a 
 
 Q
 
 226 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Select Committee, or by resolution of the House itself, 
 " we should think it an object of public value and importance 
 " that t/icre should be a means of its fuller elucidation, in order 
 " to impress on the minds of tlte House and of the country the 
 "extreme difficulty in which we are placed. I do not believe 
 " that any repressive measure, however judicious, will ever 
 " attain the whole of tJie object in view? Certainly not, 
 unless the repressive measure were co-extensive with the * 
 object in view, and covered the whole ground of that which 
 you were aiming at ; and in that case the repressive mea- 
 sure would appear destructive. There was an ingenuous 
 simplicity in Mr. Russell's question ; there was no ingen- 
 uous simplicity in Mr. Gladstone's answer. Mr. Russell is 
 a Roman Catholic, and therefore bound to do all he can 
 against the Representative system. 
 
 The inspired Times, the next morning, had to improve 
 the occasion which had thus been furnished : " The objec- 
 tions to applying the rules for urgent business, framed 
 " by the Speaker, to the discussion of the Estimates, are 
 " obvious. But what is to be done f If a certain number 
 " of members are resolved to stretch to the uttermost their 
 " strict rights of criticism and debate, when it is evident 
 " that there is barely time, with the swiftest despatch, to 
 " get through work which cannot be left undone, the curtail- 
 " ment of the rights so abused becomes clearly a public duty. 
 ". . . Probably it may be found necessary to impose 
 " restrictions in respect of urgency, even on discussion in 
 " Supply." How simple of the Times ! How truly naive ! 
 How ingenuous ! It had seen members obstructing ; it 
 knew that much ; but it knew no more ! How should it ? 
 It supposed, the innocent creature, that every one in the 
 House acted openly, honestly, and above-board ; of course 
 they did ! Did you, then, never hear of members having 
 been employed by the Government to obstruct the business 
 of the House ? Did you never hear a whisper of the whole 
 plan, well ! conspiracy, yes, call it a conspiracy, if you like 
 to cause obstruction, in order apparently to force its
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 227 
 
 hand into giving Romanist measures ; and also to warrant 
 it in getting rid of Representative government, in obedience 
 to the Syllabus, and for the pleasure of the Jesuits ? Did 
 you never hear that Mr. D'Israeli had so employed the 
 Irish members ? Ay ; suborned them ! Be it so, if you 
 wish Did you never hear it ? Did you not hear that Mr. 
 Gladstone had done the same ? Have you already for- 
 gotten the debate of February 25, 1881 ? Listen then to 
 " Honest Joe Cowen," that outspoken, eloquent man, who 
 can say just what he knows and thinks ; listen to him, 
 as your Treasury Bench listened, in unspeakable horror: 
 " Obstruction was fostered by articles in magazines, over 
 " distinguished signatures, and by the action of fat prominent 
 " members of tlie Opposition, who came down and lent the 
 " light of their countenance to the Irish members, in their 
 " struggles with the Treasury Bench." Or if you prefer it, 
 take the testimony of an Irish member : " When they (the 
 " Irish members) indulged in obstruction, Liberal members 
 " came and told them Jww the game was to be played. Their 
 " greater skill was ready to aid the ruder ignorance of the 
 " Irish body. Their higher prestige came to the assistance 
 " of the beleaguered Irish forces. Some, who had become 
 " Right Honourables, came in ' at the tail of the hunt" 
 See, then, how daring was the pretended innocence, sim- 
 plicity, and ignorance of the Times ! Daring, and even 
 foolhardy, it fell wide of its mark. The article was 
 ineffective. The general feeling of terror and insecurity, 
 as at the impending death of a great monarch, was too 
 widespread to be manipulated by the Times. 
 
 No. XXXVII. 
 
 ON the 8th of March, in answer to a question of Sir 
 Stafford Northcote, Mr. Gladstone again endeavoured to 
 stir the mind of the House to agree to put down Obstruc- 
 tion by restricting its own liberties. He complained that
 
 223 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "the present condition of business in the House, places us 
 " under most severe limitations " ; and he endeavoured to 
 show that it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to 
 pass the necessary votes in Supply, and the Ways and 
 Means Act, before the end of the financial year, to say 
 nothing of the Mutiny Act, on which he expected dis- 
 cussion. There was no hearty response in the House ; 
 no response at all. Something more, then, must be done 
 to stir the House up. Mr. Finigan complained of the 
 " beastly bellowing " of the right hon. gentlemen on the 
 Treasury Bench. After considerable haggling, after the 
 fashion of, " Said I, a better soldier ? I said, an older 
 " soldier, not a better " the words were withdrawn. Then 
 Mr. O'Donnell rose on a " new point of order," for which 
 he was "named," by Dr. Playfair ; and Sir W. Harcourt 
 moved, amid " tremendous uproar," that he be suspended. 
 Mr. Biggar addressed the House, seated and with his hat 
 
 on, beginning: "The disgraceful ," but the feelings 
 
 of the hon. member, although, no doubt, finding vent in 
 graceful phrases, " were drowned in the uproar," and dis- 
 graceful din of the British House of Commons. Mr. 
 O'Donnell was clearly in the right, and was the victim of 
 oppression. He was sacrificed to the necessity of fanning 
 the dying embers of obstruction. Mr. O'Donnell, without 
 law, suffered a Parliamentary execution, in order to excite 
 a welcome rebellion. 
 
 The next day, the Committee on the " Peace Preserva- 
 tion (Ireland) Bill," was down in the Orders; and 
 Urgency was proposed and carried by Mr. Gladstone. 
 The Committee was to be finished and reported by three 
 o'clock that day. After all the amendments had been 
 knocked off, the Chairman said : " The question is that 
 "I report this Bill to the House." That question, Mr. 
 Callan insisted on debating. There were " loud cries of 
 Chair ! and a great uproar." Mr. Callan was choked off. 
 Yet he died hard, after repeated attempts to be heard. 
 When the Speaker had returned to the chair, the point
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 229 
 
 was again raised ; but the Speaker gave his decision in 
 favour of the Chairman's ruling. The next morning, there 
 were encomiums on the conduct of the Speaker, for " act- 
 " ing (as he said himself) upon a liberal view of the spirit 
 "of his rules." Yet he had admitted that there were 
 omissions in his hasty draft of the rules, so that they 
 altogether failed to bear upon that point. By a liberal 
 interpretation, the Speaker meant an interpretation on 
 the side of increased rigour and oppression. The word 
 " liberal," in his mind, denoted oppression of liberty. 
 Recent facts have quite borne out that Radical view of 
 the term "liberal." When Mr. Speaker Brand received a 
 peerage, he assumed the title of Hampden / 
 
 On the loth of March, Urgency was again moved by 
 Mr. Gladstone on the Report of the Arms Bill ; and, at 
 ten o'clock the time fixed for concluding the debate on 
 the Report some of the remaining amendments were 
 hurried through without debate. Only some of them. 
 The Speaker refused to put the first, " because it clearly 
 "could not be entertained by the House." The second, 
 third, and fourth, were not put by Mr. Speaker Brand, 
 because he considered them the same as previous amend- 
 ments. The sixth shared the same fate, on the same 
 ground. The fifth, which stood in the name of Mr. 
 O'Donnell, was not put, because the Speaker did not see 
 Mr. O'Donnell ; and many protests were raised against 
 this clear infraction of the customs of the House. The 
 next amendment was also not put, as it was similar to a 
 previous amendment. Thus a greater number of other 
 amendments were treated ; but an amendment of the 
 Home Secretary was put, with evident alacrity and relish 
 by Mr. Speaker. 
 
 The next morning, the Times had a quasi-official leader, 
 against permitting members to continue the practice of 
 putting questions to Ministers, which it pleased the Times 
 to designate as " trivial and impertinent." It also an- 
 nounced that, as the supplemental estimates must be
 
 230 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 disposed of within a week, Mr. Gladstone would, that 
 evening, "make a statement of the intentions and expecta- 
 tions of the Government with respect to Supply and 
 " other pressing business." The Government organ, the 
 Daily News, said on the same day : " The Premier had a 
 " consultation last night with the leader of the Opposition, 
 " on the general question of the state of public business, 
 " with special reference to the necessity of forthwith 
 " passing certain votes in Committee of Supply. We 
 " understand that, whilst it is generally admitted, on the 
 " Ministerial side, that it is hopeless to expect to make 
 "progress except the Committee sit from day to day and 
 " under the Rides of Urgency, such a course will be proposed 
 " only with the assurance of the concurrence of the Oppo- 
 " sition." There was also, in the Standard, a statement 
 that the Government were framing a new rule of urgency, 
 applicable to the business of Supply. From this it became 
 pretty manifest to the minds of most men, that the House 
 of Commons, in investing the Speaker with a dictatorial 
 power of framing new rules, were really giving that power 
 to Prime Minister Gladstone and his secret allies. 
 
 That evening Mr. Baxter, of Montrose, asked Mr. Glad- 
 stone, " Whether, seeing that, notwithstanding the new 
 " rules and declarations of Urgency, the usual and necessary 
 " business of the House had been practically stopped, and 
 " the national safety thereby imperilled, Her Majesty's 
 "Government intended to propose such measures as would 
 " effectually put an end to obstruction, and, at the same 
 " time, vindicate the dignity and restore the deliberative and 
 " legislative power of Parliament." The question had most 
 likely been framed by Mr. Gladstone himself, and been 
 given to Mr. Baxter to ask. In his reply Mr. Gladstone 
 said : " I confess I do not think the expression goes far 
 "beyond the mark. On the contrary, a question of this 
 " kind reminds us that the House is involved in serious 
 " difficulties, such as are unexampled in its previous history. 
 " At the same time, I am sorry to say that we do not at
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 231 
 
 " present intend to propose measures for effectually putting 
 " an end to the evils that exist ; and for this reason : that 
 " any measures having for their object the establishment 
 "of a more satisfactory general system in the future, must 
 " necessarily be discussed, not only by the Government, 
 " but also by the House ; " that is, they must be concurred 
 in by the Conservative Opposition ; because as long as the 
 Conservatives object to the destruction of the liberties of 
 Parliament, Mr. Gladstone cannot make his conp, and the 
 Irish members must continue to gall the House (in order 
 to put a pressure on those members who desire to maintain 
 the independence of the House of Commons), and so 
 break down their opposition. 
 
 A few minutes afterwards, Mr. Gladstone made his 
 statement in regard to the course of business. He 
 assumed that, under the Rules of Urgency, the Arms Bill 
 would undoubtedly pass that night ; " but, nevertheless, 
 " the future, for which we have to provide, is very difficult 
 " and embarrassing. . . . Her Majesty's Government 
 "think it is quite impossible for us to escape without 
 " sacrifice, and the only question is that the sacrifice 
 " should be of the smallest. . . . But what I Jiave now 
 " to say about business, does not in tJte least degree contemplate 
 " what is called Obstruction. TJte provisions which we think 
 " necessary to expedite Supply are not framed on tJie supposi- 
 " tion that obstruction to Supply is intended ; but they are 
 " framed not only on the supposition, but the knowledge 
 " that, when proposals for Supply are made, gentlemen 
 " have large opportunities of making preliminary motions, 
 " which they are perfectly entitled to make, and which we 
 " have no right whatever to consider obstructive motions." 
 So, then, Urgency is to be declared in Supply, not to meet 
 an abnormal state of things called Obstruction, but in order 
 to take from members their large, but ancient and neces- 
 sary opportunities of stating grievances before granting 
 Supplies ! Mr. Gladstone continued, " It will be my duty 
 " to give notice to-day to move, upon Monday, that the
 
 232 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " state of public business is urgent with reference to votes 
 " in Supply. . . . My duty will be, at half-past four 
 " o'clock on Monday, to declare that the votes of Com- 
 " mittee of Supply for the several Supplementary and 
 "other Estimates for the service of the year 1 880-81 ; 
 " votes A and I, for the Army and Navy; and the votes 
 " for the Civil Service, and the Revenue Departments 
 "services for 1881-82 now before the House, are urgent; 
 " and that it is of importance that the same be proceeded 
 " with without delay. And it will be my duty then to 
 " move, in conformity with that declaration, that the state 
 " of public business is urgent ; and to move that, until the 
 " House shall otherwise order, Committee of Supply shall 
 " have precedence of all orders of the day and notices of 
 " motion, from day to day, until the votes declared urgent 
 " shall have been disposed of." Sir Stafford Northcote 
 thought it a " very serious evil that the propositions of the 
 " Government for imposing burdens on the people should 
 " be put from the Chair without discussion." Mr. Glad- 
 stone replied. As a bait to members, he held out the 
 hope that, after their " long and serious labours, the Easter 
 " recess should be prolonged to a reasonable length." His 
 reason for declaring urgency and stopping discussion was, 
 that he would allow members to waste an abnormal time 
 in amusements! Credat Jud<zus ! Mr. Dillwyn "quite 
 " agreed with the right hon. gentleman, that they must go 
 "further in the dangerous and unconstitutional course on 
 " which they had entered" ; whereupon Mr. Speaker Brand 
 at once interrupted that old and experienced member, and 
 promptly reminded him that there was no motion before 
 the House ! Mr. Dillwyn " thought that when they were 
 " asked to forego one of their most valued privileges, hon. 
 " members might be allowed to say a few words." Mr. 
 Gladstone spoke again, and was allowed to do so, although 
 " there was no question before the House." Then Mr. 
 Speaker Brand rose and said : " I may inform the House 
 " that I have prepared rules of urgency, which I will lay on
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 233 
 
 " the table to-day." Sir M. Beach asked, " Whether those 
 " were to be the last of the rules, so that it would in no 
 " case be in the power of the Speaker to frame additional 
 " rules ? " Mr. Speaker answered : " If I were to reply 
 " to that question in the affirmative, I SHOULD BE 
 " LIMITING THE POWER THE HOUSE HAS PLACED IN 
 " MY HANDS " ! ! ! Lord Randolph Churchill : " Then it 
 " would be in your power, sir, to frame rules for urgency 
 "during the whole time the Committee of Supply was 
 " voted urgent ? " The Speaker said : " No doubt, under 
 " the resolution passed by the House on the third of 
 " February last." Indeed ! How little the House knew 
 what they were doing on the third of February last. They 
 had been hoodwinked by a carefully prepared obstruction, 
 in order to be annihilated by a cunning and grinding 
 despotism. But then the House of Commons is a stand- 
 ing contradiction to the Papal anathemas of Representative 
 Government, and has always stood in the way of the de- 
 velopment of the Jesuit schemes. 
 
 At half-past one that night, Mr. Speaker Brand laid his 
 new rules upon the table. By the first rule, all statement 
 of grievances, and all amendments on the motion for going 
 into Supply, were cut off. Secondly, no one shall speak 
 more than once in Committee, except (3) the Minister; 
 (4) the Chairman may put the question at any time, 
 by a sort of cloture, thus shutting out all inconvenient 
 scrutiny of the proposed expenditure. If the control of 
 the purse is the source of power, the loss of that control is 
 the destruction of power. Thus Mr. Gladstone gave notice 
 of the annihilation of Parliament and the speedy destruc- 
 tion of the British Constitution. 
 
 The succeeding morning, March 12, the Times took 
 fright and sounded a note of warning : " Last night 
 " murmurs were heard ; and they are the sure beginning 
 " of a rising storm." It then admitted that the new rules 
 were of a most "drastic character"; and it called Mr. 
 Gladstone's proposal " unprecedented," and " a proposal
 
 234 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " which will startle the most easy-going politicians, and 
 " will remind them how far we have travelled in this 
 " session " ; and " a striking departure from constitutional 
 " usage " ; and, in short, " a most alarming proposal." 
 Yet Speaker Brand, who promulgated those rules, has 
 been made a Viscount, and has assumed the honoured 
 name of Hampden ! The Daily News, also, feared that 
 it was a permanent surrender of the most valuable privi- 
 leges of the English Parliament The Spectator, perceiving 
 the storm that was arising, endeavoured to turn the feeling 
 into a useful channel, and recommended a decentralising 
 measure (Home Rule), by putting off, on local assemblies, 
 all local business ; together with a Bill to take, out of the 
 field of specific statutory enactment, a considerable portion 
 of the questions now determined by Acts of Parliament, 
 and to subject them to the determination of the proper 
 administrative authorities. 
 
 All Saturday (March 12) the storm was rising ; and the 
 succeeding Sunday it grew in intensity. If the Conservative 
 party could be persuaded, at this critical juncture, to give its 
 support to Mr. Gladstone, the nefarious cause might yet be 
 saved. The party was hastily called together on Saturday. 
 As no debate was to be permitted on the proposal of Mr. 
 Gladstone (under the Rule of February 3), Sir Stafford 
 Northcote had no other means of addressing the House 
 of Commons and the country than by a letter to his 
 constituents, in the public prints. Such a letter appeared 
 in the Times of Monday, March 14. It announced that : 
 " The question is one of vital importance, not in a party 
 " sense, but as touching the very essence and marrow of 
 " our Parliamentary system. For Mr. Gladstone's proposal 
 " threatens to subvert the rights and the liberties of the 
 " House of Commons, in relation to the two great func- 
 " tions that of discussing grievances before it votes the 
 " Supplies, and that of criticising the Estimates, and con- 
 " trolling their amount, before it grants the demands of 
 " the Minister. If Ministers are to be allowed
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 235 
 
 " Urgency because they are behindhand with Supply, it is 
 " not very hazardous to prophesy that they will often be 
 " behindhand again, and that all the safeguards not too 
 " strong even now which the jealousy of Parliament has 
 " provided against Ministerial extravagance, will be broken 
 " down and dispersed to the winds. . . . The boldness 
 " I had almost used a stronger word of the present 
 " proposal will be seen, if we consider for a moment the 
 " classes of Supply for which urgency is claimed. It is 
 " claimed, in the first place, for supplementary votes. 
 " Supplementary votes are exactly those which are open 
 " to the gravest abuse, and which, therefore, demand the 
 " strictest criticism. ... If a Minister is to be allowed 
 " to claim Urgency in the month of March, because he 
 "wants to pass a number of supplementary estimates 
 " which he has approved since the House of Commons 
 " accepted his original calculations, he may greatly weaken, 
 " if he does not altogether elude, the most effective part of 
 " its control." 
 
 If we were to stop here, some might exclaim, "Not only 
 "has the Conservative party kicked against the attempt 
 "to rob the House of Commons of its liberties, but Sir 
 " Stafford Northcote himself is in ignorance of the con- 
 " spiracy to destroy the Representative system in England, 
 " and has stumbled into a resistance against the plot." So 
 every one would think on reading so far. Yet, alas ! there 
 follows a pledge that, if Obstruction should be renewed, 
 if the public mind should become so far calmed as to 
 render it safe to repeat the " disgraceful scenes " and ob- 
 structive measures, then Sir Stafford and the Conservative 
 party would fall in with the scheme of Mr. Gladstone: 
 " Should some unexpected obstruction really arise in the 
 " way of these necessary measures, the powerful engine of 
 " the urgency vote can always be appealed to in the last 
 " resort, and for the purposes strictly defined and limited. 
 " . . . . But, as matters at present stand, we have no 
 "evidence that any organized obstruction to the general
 
 236 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " business of Parliament is intended. Mr. Gladstone him- 
 " self makes his proposals, irrespective of such a contingency ; 
 " Jie has not done anything like his best to get the facilities he 
 " requires in tJie ordinary way. He has distinctly exagger- 
 "ated-the supposed necessities of the case." 
 
 That morning (March 14) the Times predicted the failure 
 of Mr. Gladstone's scheme. The Daily News observed 
 that, while the House of Commons imagined that it was 
 simply putting down Irish obstruction, it was really recon- 
 stituting its own relations to that Executive Government 
 which it should control. It also urged that an extension 
 of Local Government (Home Rule) would relieve Parlia- 
 ment of many burdensome and time-consuming duties. 
 The Standard was not certain that the refusal to grant the 
 Government demand that night, might not exaggerate the 
 very evil of which Sir Stafford Northcote had complained ; 
 and it predicted that otherwise there was danger lest 
 urgency should be necessarily resorted to some days hence, 
 under more objectionable circumstances. But if it was 
 true that Mr. Chamberlain had become chief proprietor 
 of the Standard, of course it had to be regarded as the 
 Radical Government organ. Mr. Gladstone was in a cleft 
 stick. He had given notice of his intention, and could not 
 retreat, merely because Sir Stafford had written a letter to 
 the Times. He had asked for a vote of urgency in Supply, 
 saying that it was absolutely impossible to carry on the 
 Government of the country unless he had it. Sir Stafford 
 refused to grant it. Mr. Gladstone had, therefore, either 
 to give himself the lie he had either to carry on the 
 Government in a way that he had asserted to be absolutely 
 impossible ; or else he had to throw up the reins of office, 
 and see Sir Stafford accomplish that which Mr. Gladstone 
 could not perform. In either case, the House of Commons 
 would be made ridiculous by its action, and would get 
 deeper into the mess that Mr. Gladstone had made. Mr. 
 Gladstone determined to make the motion, with defeat 
 staring him in the face. As Sir Stafford had published, in
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 237 
 
 a letter, those reasons which he was not allowed to advance 
 in the House of Commons, Mr. Gladstone determined to 
 evade the rule against debating the motion, by giving his 
 reply in an answer to a preconcerted question by Mr. 
 Dillwyn. On March 14, Mr. Gladstone thus made his 
 statement on the matter, where no statement was allowed ; 
 and Mr. Speaker Brand, although called upon to stop him, 
 "did not feel himself called upon to interpose in the 
 "matter." The motion for Urgency in Supply found 
 296 supporters against 212 opponents. It was therefore 
 lost, as it did not obtain the acquiescence of three-quarters 
 of the members in the House. Mr. Gladstone then said, 
 with some pique, " The House having, for strong reasons, 
 "thought fit, with regard to the question for urgency, to 
 " place the direction of its proceedings in the hands of the 
 
 " minority of the House " At this point there were 
 
 prolonged cheers and cries of " Oh ! Oh ! " during which 
 each member framed for himself, in his own mind, the 
 conclusion of the sentence. Mr. Gladstone at length closed 
 the sentence with these words : " I, of course, acquiesce in 
 " and accept that decision ! " What a lame, claudicant, 
 and impotent conclusion ! He doubtless rested in his 
 mind on the saving clause of Sir Stafford's letter: " Should 
 " some unexpected obstruction really arise," the Conserva- 
 tive party would not oppose the resort to the urgency vote. 
 Mr. Gladstone had declared that his proposal of urgency 
 was made irrespective of such a contingency as obstruc- 
 tion ; but he could doubtless provide all the obstruction 
 that might be requisite to meet Sir Stafford's conscientious 
 qualms or pusillanimous fears. 
 
 Not at present, however ; not at present ; the public 
 mind is too suspicious and excited. It must first be lulled, 
 and calmed, and soothed, and mesmerised to sleep. On 
 the I5th, Sir Walter Barttelot asked how it was that Supply 
 had been got through before midnight, not only without 
 obstruction, but with quite an unexampled rapidity, and 
 even slovenly haste ? It was very odd ! The " absolutely
 
 238 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "impossible" had been so easily accomplished! There 
 must have been some miracle! Indeed, Gladstone looked, 
 somehow, in these days, as saintly as he does in Rich- 
 mond's picture. Mr. Gladstone said, in excuse, that votes 
 enough had been put on the paper to have occupied the 
 Committee, according to the ordinary measure of rapidity, 
 for a sitting of the full length ; but that, instead of 
 obstinate obstruction in Supply, there had been a too 
 rapid despatch of business. Were Mr. Gladstone's prog- 
 nostications, then, in error ? or was all this intended and 
 " managed " ? 
 
 The next night (March 16) precisely the same thing 
 occurred. In spite of the former night's experience to 
 correct a too stinted programme, again there was a too 
 rapid dispatch of business ! Again the " absolutely im- 
 " possible " had been so readily accomplished ! The next 
 day it was hinted, in the public prints 1 that Ministers 
 had before been purposely causing delay, in order to im- 
 press the country and the House of Commons with the 
 virtues and advantages of urgency. Yet no ! That could 
 not be ! Such a device was far too wicked for such a high- 
 minded and saintly Government, with the sea-green 
 immaculate at the head of it. Surely it could not have 
 promoted obstruction in order to denounce it ; and still 
 less so, in order to crush the liberties of the House of 
 Commons as the Russian Government, in 1862, actually 
 tried to get up a rebellion in Poland, as an excuse for 
 crushing the Poles. 
 
 No. XXXVIII. 
 
 IT was on the I4th of March that so large a section of the 
 House proved restive, and the scheme for establishing 
 Urgency in Supply was defeated. The lulling process was 
 then at once begun, and assiduously carried on. Suspicions 
 had to be allayed ; Members had to be reassured, and 
 1 e.g. St. James's Gazette, March 17.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 239 
 
 persuaded that ministers had not purposely caused the 
 obstruction, in order to impress the House and the country 
 with the virtues and advantages of Urgency. On the i/th, 
 therefore, Mr. Gladstone took the opportunity of a friendly, 
 or at least, opportune question, to announce that : "Honour- 
 " able members, in all quarters, apply themselves to the 
 "expeditious discharge of public business in such a way 
 "that, although I believe there was such a thing as 
 " obstruction, some time ago, I do not wish to believe in 
 " its survival. It seems rather like an evil dream, which I 
 " should rather be glad to dismiss." Next morning it was 
 hinted in the semi-official articles, that the sedative process 
 was made the more imperative, because " foreign cares are 
 " weighing more and more heavily upon the British 
 " Government." The sedative, narcotic system was, there- 
 fore, unremittingly pursued. Take an example : The 
 Times (March 21) announced that Mr. Gladstone would, 
 .hat evening, make a statement in regard to public business ; 
 jecause " the difficulties which seemed, a fortnight ago, to 
 ' stand inexorably in the way of Supply, have been re- 
 *' moved beyond expectation, and it is scarcely probable 
 " that a renewed demand for Urgency will be preferred." 
 That evening Mr. Baxter was again selected to put a 
 friendly question, and Mr. Gladstone replied : " I assume 
 " that to-night (March 21) we shall dispose of the necessary 
 "business in Supply, as well as, possibly, obtain several 
 " votes which are not so pressing." He therefore proposed 
 to adjourn the House a few days earlier than its wont, and 
 to ask them to meet again eight days later than usual ; 
 so that, instead of being so pressed for time that, without 
 urgency, it would have been " absolutely impossible " to 
 carry on the Government ; he confessed that he had too 
 much time on his hands, and had to request his followers 
 to divert themselves in the country, instead of attending 
 to business. This was a parallel case to that which history 
 so often relates of the Russians. They seize posts, they 
 claim territories, they make exorbitant demands, under
 
 240 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 threats of war. Their demands are yielded, the territories 
 are conceded, and new demands and claims are preferred. 
 At last their opponents, tired out and irritated, exclaim : 
 " Well, war be it then ! " and at once the demands are with- 
 drawn, and the Russians assert they did not, and never 
 might, could, would, or should have made such a claim. 
 And silence is maintained, until a fitting opportunity ap- 
 pears for again pursuing the same policy. 
 
 At this point, then, we may rest, for a time, from con- 
 sidering the attempted coup d'tiat, which went under the 
 name of Urgency. For the present we may close the 
 investigation. But not for long. Looking back over the 
 history we have narrated, we see a small band of men, 
 collected for the purpose, who were united in one common 
 object, which fired their imaginations, and inflamed their 
 passions. In that company there was an inner circle of 
 choicer spirits and more determined aim, who led the rest, 
 and believed the while that they themselves were not being 
 led. Yet an adroit few very few determined the course 
 of the inner circle, just as they were bidden to do, without, 
 perhaps, knowing the real end to which they were tending. 
 There were "wheels within wheels," circles within circles. 
 
 The House of Commons had been purposely made 
 helpless, in order to facilitate the work of that little band. 
 The Lower House were " as sheep without a shepherd " ; 
 nay, not as sheep, for sheep cling close together in danger; 
 while the House was a congeries of repellant atoms, and 
 was therefore at the mercy of the small band of Romanist 
 Irish " Patriots," who really ruled them. Then came 
 Speaker Brand, as a Dens ex machind, to the House in its 
 helplessness, and, trampling its ancient rules under his feet, 
 he poisoned the life of Parliament with his Borgia-cup of 
 Urgency ; and all men hailed him as a saviour. They felt 
 relieved, and knew not that the very soul of Parliament 
 had fled. Perhaps he too acted under orders, and knew 
 not whither he was tending. 
 
 The corruption of one Form is the birth of another. 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 241 
 
 The new Form may be a Caesarism, an absolute despotism ; 
 unlikely to last, if it do come. Or it may be a Democracy 
 first ; a democracy of impatient spirits, who kick against 
 all authority. Such a form of Government soon becomes 
 hateful, and men then hail despotism as a relief. But if 
 Englishmen have the sense to return to the ancient 
 Constitution of the realm, and revive the functions of the 
 Sovereign in Council, then, in the new form, England will 
 attain to an honest and good government, and the face of 
 the Empire will be changed. A selection of the wisest and 
 fittest, by one who is above the gusts of party feeling, to 
 advise the Sovereign in all his acts ; the unity and con- 
 tinuity of action which would therefrom result ; the cessation 
 of those false distortions of judgment, which arise from 
 party spirit, and bunkum panderings to electors, and of the 
 still worse divagations which come from the promptings of 
 vanity ; all that will be secured by the sworn secresy of 
 the Council. Faction rendered impossible by the oath of 
 all Councillors to support the decision of the Sovereign in 
 Council ; and the sense of responsibility of the Councillors, 
 which is engendered by the obligation imposed on each to 
 sign the advice, which, after investigation and debate, he 
 may give to his sovereign ; all these elements constitute 
 the best and most stable form of government which is 
 possible. Now let us return to our historical sketch. 
 
 The House of Commons was still suffering from a vague 
 suspicion, and manifest irritation. Mr. Gladstone must 
 look to it. His obliging friend and useful henchman, 
 Speaker Brand, on 22nd of May, took advantage of a 
 dinner of the Metropolitan Board of Works, to ventilate, 
 in another form, the long desired extinction of the House 
 of Commons, rather than the transference of its usurped 
 powers to their proper owner. In replying to the toast 
 of "the House of Commons," he said that the House 
 had, in its own hands, the remedy for the late hours 
 and overwork under which it had suffered. The relief 
 he suggested was " calling in the aid of the principle of 
 
 R
 
 242 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "self-government, and handing over to local authorities 
 "a portion of the work which might be better discharged 
 by local assemblies than by the Imperial Parliament " 
 Home Rule ad infinitum. He " trusted that . . . 
 " further powers of local self-government would be given to 
 " this great Metropolis. . . . What he said of London 
 " he would say also of all the large communities, not only 
 " in England, but in Ireland, and in Scotland." The next 
 day Mr. Gladstone, in the House of Commons, attempted 
 to back up the Speaker's remarks. A friendly question 
 was put to the Prime Minister, asking him whether he 
 would engage to submit, at the commencement of the 
 next session, a revision of the Standing Orders of the 
 House, " with a view to economise the public time." 
 Mr. Gladstone replied that "he was of opinion that the 
 " arrangements of the House, as to the conduct of its 
 " business, had become a question of the first magnitude, 
 " and demanded the attention of the Government." The 
 following morning, a semi-official article appeared in the 
 " Leading Journal," l in order to lead the people of 
 England along the chosen track. After rehearsing what 
 had occurred, as to the question and reply, and speaking 
 of " the present maimed and overburdened session," 
 it remarked that " Lord Hartington had lately hinted 
 " that he, for one, would not be unprepared to enter- 
 tain large proposals for the reform of Parliamentary 
 " procedure ; and the Speaker . . . expressed an 
 " opinion that some changes were inevitable." It then 
 announced, with an official air, that : " it is not improbable 
 " that next year, the revision of the standing orders may 
 " become one of the chief topics of political discussion." 
 The next day, a leader was devoted to melancholy fore- 
 bodings and angry meanings, at the proceedings of the 
 " Parnellite members," and the delays to the progress of 
 the Ministerial measure, and the " purposeless waste of 
 " time." The cause of lamentation was as follows : at 
 1 Times, May 24.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 243 
 
 half-past three o'clock in the morning, Mr. McCarthy had 
 risen to move his vote of censure on the Irish Executive. 
 He was fully justified in doing so ; for the Prime Minister 
 had before promised him a morning sitting for the purpose; 
 but the first half of it had been monopolized by the 
 Government for their Budget Bill ; and the latter part had 
 been eaten up by a wrangle on " a purely formal matter 
 " of business." Another morning sitting had been devoted 
 to the question ; and towards the close of it, the Irish 
 Secretary attacked Mr. Parnell, and said that there was 
 in Ireland a "combination to make robbery successful by 
 " armed resistance" He was purposely trailing his coat- 
 tails, as an irritation to Paddy's combative propensities ! 
 He continued : " If we allozv this conspiracy to succeed, we 
 " shall strike a blow against all law in Ireland, and do 
 " that which would be disgraceful to any Government? 
 Naturally Mr. Parnell took up the gauntlet, and desired to 
 reply; and, as the end of the morning sitting had been 
 already reached, he demanded that more time should be 
 allotted to him. That was the occasion of the plaint of 
 the Times, still harping, in official manner, on the old tune : 
 " the House of Commons is useless : repress the House 
 "of Commons"! The Ministerialists in the House itself 
 had been " educated." They pointed to the session, of 
 \vhich five months had already elapsed, and complained 
 that there was nothing to show for it, except two Irish 
 Coercion Bills, and one Irish Land Bill. The fault, they 
 said, was not with the Government ; it came of the declin- 
 ing efficiency of Parliament Ministers themselves threw 
 out hints, nay, they did more than hint the necessity 
 of revolutionizing the system of Parliamentary procedure. 
 Lord Hartington declared himself in favour of a cloture, 
 without the necessity of a majority of two-thirds, a 
 cloture decreed by a simple majority, at any time. Let 
 us remember that this state of things was brought about. 
 It did not happen. The Ministry came in, with a 
 power ready to their hands for repressing disorder in
 
 244 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Ireland. They considered and debated it among them- 
 selves, and were induced to throw that power to the 
 winds. The disorder began to show itself; and was 
 inflamed by the speeches of Ministers themselves, who 
 expatiated on the wrongs of Ireland, and the injustice 
 of landlords ; of Ministers who proclaimed that " physical 
 force was no remedy," and promised that physical force 
 should not be used by the Government. To give weight 
 to their words, they actually agreed with Parnell that 
 the police should be withdrawn. In the House itself, 
 obstruction was intentionally prepared. Articles were 
 written ; speeches were made ; and Liberal leaders walked 
 below the gangway to encourage the obstructors, and to 
 advise the next step in obstruction. Thus the agitation 
 in the country, and the obstruction in the House, were 
 fostered by the Ministry, with the purpose of abolishing 
 the House of Commons. Nor were the Radical leaders 
 less active than those who were in the secret. During the 
 Whitsuntide holidays, Mr. Chamberlain, at Birmingham, 
 endeavoured to fan the flames of agitation. He said : 
 " Since the Easter holidays, every day of Government time 
 " has been given, without intermission, in order to promote 
 " the progress of this great and vitally important measure ; 
 " and yet up to the present moment, only six lines of the 
 " Bill, which consists of over a thousand lines, have passed 
 " through committee." 
 
 On the morning of the reassembling of Parliament after 
 Whitsuntide, the Times produced another of its semi-official 
 " threats. It asserted that " Supply itself is urgent, 
 " and is daily becoming more so " ; and that " the situation 
 " calls for sacrifice and forbearance on the part of every 
 " member of Parliament who is not deliberately bent on 
 " bringing the House of Commons into disrepute. 
 " Parliamentary procedure, if not Parliamentary Govern- 
 " ment itself, is now on its trial before the country." The 
 Times further pointed out that the waste of time was due, 
 almost entirely, to the party which is manipulated and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 245 
 
 wielded by Mr. Gladstone : " Of the time already consumed 
 " in committee on the Land Bill, at least tJiree-fourtlis, if 
 " not four-fiftlis, has been occupied by amendments proceeding 
 " from the Liberal side of the House? Rightly the Times 
 designated the situation as " a moment of grave crisis in 
 " the affairs of the United Kingdom." Rightly it added 
 that : " The business of the House is urgent in the last 
 " degree ; and yet it is blocked and obstructed in all 
 "directions. . . . Well may Mr. Chamberlain say 
 " that the urgent question of the moment, the point to 
 "which every Reformer should now direct his first 
 "attention, is the reform of the procedure of the House 
 " of Commons." l 
 
 No. XXXIX. 
 
 AT the close of June, iSSij the same old tactics were 
 resorted to : obstruction by the Irish members on one 
 day, to exasperate the House of Commons ; and a motion 
 by Mr. Gladstone on the morrow, to restrict the privileges 
 of the House. An inspired article in the Times, of June 
 28, as usual, commorated on the old theme : " The atti- 
 " tude of the Irish members who follow the lead of Mr. 
 " Parnell threatens indirect, if not direct, obstruction, 
 " aimed at a measure, the defeat of which, it is acknow- 
 " ledged, would cause the keenest disappointment through- 
 "out Ireland." It urged that on the previous evening, 
 more than an hour had been wasted on a preconcerted 
 attack on Mr. Forster ; and more time was then frittered 
 away by attempts to bait, and so get up a wrangle with 
 other Ministers. The adjournment was moved, in order 
 to discuss the rents of the Duke of Devonshire's estates 
 in Waterford. During this debate, eleven speeches were 
 delivered by the Irish members alone. The aim was 
 manifest. Yet the Times said, with wonderful naiveti : 
 
 1 Times, June 9, 1881.
 
 246 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " It is difficult to understand the object of these extra- 
 " ordinary tactics." Difficult, indeed, for any one who is 
 not in the secret ! but yet possible for any one who will 
 take the trouble to put two and two together, and watch, 
 from day to day, the tendency of those deeds which are 
 called " events." Events do not happen ; they are caused. 
 After suggesting various explanations of the extraordinary 
 tactics, and refuting each in its turn, the Times added : " It 
 " is obvious that even the surrender of the whole of the 
 " time of private members to the Government, may not be 
 " enough to secure the passage of the Bill within a reason- 
 " able time, if the Irish party continue to display the spirit 
 " of which they gave a sample yesterday." Another article 
 commenced ominously. It showed that the writer in the 
 Times was at least "in the secret." It began: "The imper- 
 " fection of Parliament as a legislative machine, is, from 
 " time to time, brought to notice in a striking manner ; and 
 " an illustration of this is before us." 
 
 The next day, Mr. Gladstone moved that the Land Bill 
 shall have precedence of all other business on all days 
 when it is down among the orders of the day. Sir Stafford 
 Northcote was there to play his part. It seemed that some 
 members simulated opposition, in order to stifle it ; and 
 pretended a zeal for the privileges of Parliament and the 
 liberties of the people, in order to betray them. Satisfied 
 with the name of an Opposition, no one opposed. It was 
 merely pointed out, that the form of the motion would 
 permit the Government to rob private members of their 
 nights, by adding the Land Bill on to the end of the orders 
 on private members' nights ; while the Government might 
 use Government nights for any other business they chose. 
 It was, in fact, a new mode of stifling all independent 
 criticism, and all independent action. The pretext for this 
 motion was a desire to hurry on the Land Bill. And yet 
 the Government took care, by their motion, not to pledge 
 themselves to proceed de die in diem with that Bill. The 
 motion merely gave them the right and power to exclude
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 247 
 
 every private member's motion, and every debate originat- 
 ing from any outsider. In this respect the motion was 
 different from that which had been adopted by the House 
 at an earlier period of the session, during the passage of 
 the Coercion Bills. Of this discrepancy, Mr. Gladstone 
 offered no explanation. Sir Stafford Northcote asked for 
 an explanation ; but Mr. Gladstone resented it as an 
 imputation on his good faith, and declined to give any 
 specific pledge that the Government would proceed con- 
 tinuously with the Land Bill, on Government nights as 
 well as private members' nights. The motion was, never- 
 theless, unanimously carried. 
 
 We are now drawing near the close of the prolonged 
 session of 1881. The agitation against the House of 
 Commons was then stimulated anew. At the Mansion 
 House dinner, on August J, Mr. Gladstone set the ball 
 a-rolling : " It has been our painful experience to see that 
 " great and noble assembly, the House of Commons the 
 " greatest and noblest of all representative assemblies in 
 " the world, to which many of us here belong in some 
 " degree disabled, in some degree dishonoured in the 
 " pursuit and accomplishment of its great work. Its regu- 
 " lations, intended for the defence of liberty, and especially 
 " for securing the liberty of individuals, have been employed 
 " for purposes for which they were not intended ; and the 
 " weapons which the wisdom of the House of Commons 
 " has furnished, for its defence against external foes, have 
 " been turned, by some, either ungrateful or at least erring, 
 " against itself. My Lord Mayor, we have seen a state of 
 " things arise, which undoubtedly has created a necessity 
 " a necessity whick I do not doubt will be met by adequate 
 " measures for considering, not merely the many and 
 " great subjects which demand the care of the Legislature 
 " of this country, but for considering, perhaps, in the first 
 "place of all, the condition of the great instrument of 
 " Legislation, on which the prosecution and defence of all 
 " your interests mainly depend."
 
 248 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Mr. Gladstone responded, in those words, to the toast 
 of Her Majesty's Ministers. The Marquis of Hartington 
 replied for the House of Commons : " I have observed 
 "that, to-night, warned, perhaps, by some words which 
 " fell from the Prime Minister, the Lord Mayor has not 
 " thought it his duty to pass any very high eulogium upon 
 " the conduct of the present House of Commons during 
 " this session ; and I can assure you that I have no inten- 
 " tion, upon this occasion, of claiming for that House any 
 "greater credit than his lordship has been willing to confer 
 " on it. When tlu- history of this session is written, it will 
 " be found to be mainly a record of tJie achievements of one 
 " man. I am not speaking of the possible results of the 
 " session in after history, because that none of us can know. 
 " But I speak merely of the Parliamentary history of the 
 " session ; and / say it will be a record of tlic energy and the 
 " resolution, of the knowledge and t/te resource, with which 
 "one man has conducted one great measure through the 
 " House of Commons under singular difficulties. . . . But 
 "I think it must be admitted that, in spite of the laborious 
 " cJiaracter of the session, the result will have been entirely 
 " inadequate. In saying this, however, I see no reason for 
 "one moment to change the opinion which I previously 
 " formed, and which many better judges than myself 
 "formed, as to the character of the present House of 
 " Commons. / believe that no House of Commons has e:\-r 
 "contained within its walls more men of great ability, of 
 "great industry and energy, of greater devotion to the public 
 "service; and in saying this, I do not desire to make any 
 " exception as to any quarter of the House. . . . Are 
 " we to suppose, are we to believe that because the House of 
 " Commons, composed of such excellent materials, has failed 
 " adequately to do the work which it was sent to do, Parlia- 
 " men taty institutions, as now constituted, are no longer com- 
 < pctent to meet t/te wants and requirements of the country ? 
 " I am far from forming any such conclusion." 
 
 Mr. Bright, " who yielded to loud and persistent calls for
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 249 
 
 " a supplementary speech from him," supplementary, that 
 is, to the speech of Lord Hartington, said : " I have also 
 " come, in some degree, hot from one of the Houses of 
 " Parliament ; and I feel disposed, with your permission, 
 " to make a few observations as to the length of the session, 
 " the arduous nature of our work, and the generally unpro- 
 " ductive way in which much of our time has been ex- 
 " pended. In fact, we begin to think that the House of 
 " which we are members, which is a very respectable, and 
 " is considered to be a very honourable body, is, after all, 
 " a little too old, and wants repairs of an extensive cha- 
 racter. ... I have said that the machine is respectable, 
 " but it wants mending ; and I do not believe that the mere 
 "oiling of it will suffice. I suspect that there will have to 
 "be considerable changes made, by which Bills will not 
 " have to go through so many stages ; that the debates 
 " will, by some means, have to be shortened ; that, when 
 " men have said enough, or as much as the House wishes 
 " to hear, there should be some mode of requesting them 
 " to be silent ; but, above all, it seems to me necessary that 
 " the House, if possible, should be composed of men of 
 " gentlemanly spirit. . . . But, if there be men in the 
 " House who have no respect for it, who think obstruction 
 " a pleasure, who look even upon the degradation of the 
 " House as a pleasing object of contemplation ; if there be, 
 " what you may term, a hostile element in Parliament, then 
 " you may have the freedom of Parliamentary debate, and 
 " Parliamentary arrangements, turned into a weapon by 
 " which Parliament itself may be wounded, and almost 
 " destroyed."
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. XL. 
 
 IT will have been observed that Mr. Gladstone, in replying 
 to the toast of the Ministry, went out of his way to make 
 an attack on the House of Commons, and to speak of the 
 necessity of sweeping "measures for considering the con- 
 dition of the great instrument of legislation." The House 
 of Commons (he said) had never worked harder, nor ever 
 worked so long as in the session of 1881 ; and yet the 
 results were most disappointing. It did not meet the 
 legitimate demands of the country for absolutely necessary 
 changes in legislation "necessities which ought to be met 
 " in deference to the true wants of the nation ; " and it 
 was " almost entirely cut off from the discharge of its 
 obligations." In other words, the House of Commons, 
 even when it does its best, is found to be an utterly useless 
 machine for legislation. 
 
 Lord Hartington, who followed him, dilated on the 
 same theme, and expanded exactly the same idea, the 
 idea which had evidently been broached and debated in 
 the Cabinet by way of " educating " the Ministers up to a 
 certain point. He first reduced the Cabinet to one man. 
 Mr. Gladstone is the Government ; and the other ministers 
 are his head clerks, who merely work out his decrees, with- 
 out knowing their aim. His lordship then said, that the 
 House consisted, more than at any former period, of men 
 of great ability, great industry, great energy, and great 
 devotion to the public service. That description (he said) 
 was true not only of a portion of the House, but also of 
 " every quarter of it " (and there were, as we know, four 
 parties in the House). Yet the results had been " entirely 
 " inadequate." If this, then, were so in the case of a most 
 excellent House, how much more would it be so in every 
 inferior House ! In short, Parliamentary institutions were 
 no longer competent to meet the wants and requirements 
 of the country.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 251 
 
 We must bear in mind that the speeches of Ministers at 
 a Lord Mayor's banquet are always carefully considered in 
 the Cabinet beforehand. The Ministers who are told off 
 to speak, are to dilate on some particular topic, which has 
 to be agitated in the country, and has to form the text for 
 discussion in the public journals ; and they are allowed to 
 say just so much as has been prescribed and no more. 
 But Mr. Bright was pressed for an impromptu speech. He 
 had not received any cue. He had to say what was upper- 
 most in his mind, and he naturally spoke of that of which 
 he had lately heard so much in the secret adyta of the 
 Cabinet. He uttered the educational lessons he had so 
 lately received. He said that the House of Commons had 
 become too old ; it had outlived its time. When, in its 
 younger days, it was occupied with faction fights, it did 
 well enough ; but since it had taken to legislating, and 
 had usurped various functions of the Crown, to the exer- 
 cise of which it was never adapted, it had proved a miser- 
 able failure. Very "considerable changes will therefore 
 " have to be made," changes which amount to the most 
 straitening limitation possible, of the freedom of debate. 
 Moreover, Parliament (he said) must consist, in future, only 
 of " gentlemen " ; and as you can never be sure of consti- 
 tuencies excluding every one who does not come up to 
 that standard, it follows that the members must be selected 
 and appointed by the Crown, as Privy Councillors are, and 
 always have been. There are now (he said) members who 
 love to obstruct ; and members who degrade and discredit 
 the House (he pointed to the Irish party) ; they must no 
 longer be there ; and if Irish members are no longer to 
 meet at Westminster, it follows that they must be called 
 together at College Green in Dublin. Further, there must 
 be no " hostile element " in Parliament ; there must be no 
 Opposition party ; that is, there must be an end of Party 
 Government ; and this will be possible only under a 
 Government of the Sovereign in Council. It was fortu- 
 nate that Mr. Bright was induced to make an impromptu
 
 252 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 speech ! He spoke what was in his mind ; and that was 
 in his mind which had been put there. 
 
 The ball was set a-rolling. The newspapers kept it roll- 
 ing. For example, the Daily Telegraph on August 18 
 promised that the Ministry of Mr. Gladstone would take 
 steps to cope with the growing evil of obstruction ; which 
 promise it was sure the country would hear with pleasure ; 
 as it was, on all sides, confessed that Parliament was unable 
 to do its proper work. " There can now be no manner of 
 " doubt that Parliament is overweighted (poor old decrepit 
 " man !) with the amount of work it has to perform ! " 
 Therefore (it said) a revision and modification of the exist- 
 ing Rules of Procedure are demanded. 
 
 That evening (August 18), just before the Whitebait 
 dinner, Mr. Gladstone made a speech, in which he took 
 care to give the ball a good kick : " The events of the 
 " session hardly form a fitting topic for me to dwell upon. 
 "They have been remarkable in many respects. They 
 " have been remarkable, perhaps, for the difficulty in the 
 " midst of which our duties have been discharged ; but 
 " they have been remarkable, above all things, perhaps, for 
 " this : that they have brought into view a new and great 
 " necessity a necessity in which the people of England 
 " will feel the keenest interest the necessity for restoring 
 " the House of Commons to its position as the great security 
 "for your liberties, and for enabling legislation to be car- 
 " ried on in its full sufficiency. . . . Great is the interest 
 " connected with separate subjects of legislation ; but 
 " greater still, and paramount, is the interest which must 
 " be awakened in your minds by a matter which touches 
 " vitally the condition of the great organ of all our legisla- 
 tion that noble representative assembly which has 
 " served as a pattern to the representative assemblies of 
 " the world, and which has done more than any of them, 
 " perhaps more than all of them, to cherish the aspirations 
 " of Freedom, and to maintain the traditions of law and 
 " order among the whole of civilized mankind." What a
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 253 
 
 similarity there is, not only in ideas, but also in expres- 
 sions, between this speech, and Mr. Bright's impromptu ! 
 Mr. Gladstone was evidently repeating that " educational " 
 lecture which he had delivered in the Cabinet, and which 
 Mr. Bright, like an apt pupil, had already so ably re- 
 corded. 
 
 The newspapers received, from this speech, another 
 enlivening prod of the spur. The Morning Post, on 
 Aug. 19, for example, remarked that if anything had been 
 more conclusively demonstrated than another, during the 
 past session, it had been the utter powerlessness of any and 
 every Ministry, whatever majority may follow it, to conduct 
 efficiently the affairs of the State, in presence of the tactics 
 which a section of the Irish representatives had thought 
 proper to employ. Only three opposed ministerial measures 
 two Irish Coercion Bills, and one Irish Land Bill had 
 been passed during a session of the abnormal length of 
 seven months and a half! That monstrous and unpar- 
 alleled waste of time was exclusively due to that Obstruc- 
 tion which had been employed by a few men, who openly 
 avowed that their object was to render the transaction of 
 business in the House of Commons impossible, so long as 
 Ireland was deprived of Jier own Parliament. 
 
 The Times of Aug. 26, in a leader on Mr. Gladstone's 
 speech at the Ministerial dinner, acknowledged the exist- 
 ence of Obstruction, " not during the past session only, 
 " but for several years before." The Times agreed in the 
 urgent need of taking some steps to put an end to this 
 nuisance ; but it added a note of warning : " The remedy 
 " at which his words seem to hint, is more questionable. 
 "... The case, it seems to us, presents no great 
 " difficulty thus far. Wilful Obstruction has been ruled 
 " to be an offence against order. The number of those 
 " who are professedly and habitually guilty of it, is not 
 "large;" and then it mentioned suspension or expulsion 
 as the remedies which common sense would have suggested. 
 It furthermore significantly asked : " But would this be
 
 254 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " enough to work that change zv/tic/i Mr. Gladstone is bent 
 " on accomplishing? . . . THE WHOLE THING IS VERY 
 " MUCH A CONSPIRACY, IN WHICH THE CHAMPIONS OF 
 " ORDER PLAY NOT THE LEAST PART." 
 
 In spite of the Times, the conspiracy was to be continued. 
 The Queen's Speech mentioned two Acts, as the total 
 result of the session's work ; and then Her Majesty was 
 made to add : " I regret that it has been found impossible 
 " to proceed with many measures on subjects of importance, 
 "which have been, or were prepared to be submitted to 
 " you ; and that, notwithstanding exertions almost un- 
 " paralleled, you have been unable adequately to provide 
 " the country with legislation adapted to its growing 
 "wants." The Ministry did not attempt to conceal the 
 fact that, under their leadership, the session had been 
 abortive. They must also have had some definite motive 
 in emphasizing the presumed unfitness of the House of 
 Commons to pass those legislative measures which the 
 wants of the country so urgently required. Every politician 
 must have asked himself why the House of Commons had, 
 all of a sudden, failed as a legislative machine. " Because 
 " its rules have, all of a sudden, become old and obsolete 
 " (Mr. Gladstone would have had us believe) ; that was the 
 " reason why we made the Queen proclaim the failure of 
 "the new Liberal Government." The words of Mr. Glad- 
 stone, Mr. Bright, and Lord Hartington, were then no idle 
 flourish, no empty threat ! They meant business ! 
 
 Yet observant politicians may have thought it all very 
 extraordinary, seeing that there was less Obstruction in 
 1 88 1 than there had annually been for some years. Cer- 
 tainly the Coercion Bill was, for a short time, hotly opposed ; 
 but it was never obstructed. Even that opposition was all 
 over in March. Why, then, should so much noise and out- 
 cry have been made ; why so stridulent a shriek for some 
 remedy, when the patient was not suffering much, and was 
 evidently getting well by his innate vis medicatrix natures? 
 And if the progress towards convalescence was slow, it was
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 255 
 
 because the Liberal Government were administering small 
 doses of poison, and so promoting the disease. On Sept. 2, 
 Sir Stafford Northcote advised the people of England to 
 "watch with great jealousy anything that might be pro- 
 " posed, in that direction, by gentlemen who have not a clean 
 "record in this matter" and he went on to remind his 
 hearers how Mr. Chamberlain, at that time the President 
 of the Board of Trade, and Mr. Shaw-Lefevre, the Com- 
 missioner for Public Works, had, as private members, kept 
 the House " walking through the lobbies, in division after 
 <( division, with enormous majorities" against them, through 
 the whole night of Aug. n, 1879. Yet if Obstruction be 
 such a grievous offence, said he, why was one of those 
 gentlemen rewarded with a seat in the Cabinet, while the 
 other was made First Commissioner of Public Works ? 
 
 Lest the public attention should flag, the great orator 
 and Prime Minister lost no time in again exciting it on 
 this subject. At Leeds, on Oct. 7, he said : " It is only 
 " right that I should call your attention and, indeed, 
 " I must take every opportunity that presents itself of 
 " calling the attention of the public at large to the very 
 " serious obstacles which now impede the progress of 
 " business in the House of Commons, and to assure you 
 " that, for the sake of every interest, and for the sake of 
 "every measure, it has become a matter of vital importance 
 " to consider in what way that great and noble legislative 
 " instrument, the House of Commons, which is the noblest 
 " legislative instrument in the world, can be restored to that 
 "efficiency which it once possessed if possible, with an 
 " extension and increase of that efficiency." 
 
 Sir Stafford Northcote followed it up at Newcastle, on 
 Oct. 1 1 : " The Conservative party attach importance, not 
 " to the success of a particular political connection, but to 
 " the strength, the independence, and the glory of the one 
 " of the great branches of the Legislature. Ah ! yes, it is 
 " not only for the Conservative members, but for the mem- 
 " bers of all denominations in the House of Commons that
 
 256 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " our interest ought to be excited and our anxiety ought 
 "to be given. For we are at tJie present moment going 
 " through a period of trial, a period of anxiety such as, I 
 " think, has seldom been witnessed in the House witJiin the 
 " memory of the existing generation. It is a time of trial 
 " not merely to those who happen to be in a minority, but for 
 "all who have the honour of a seal in the House a time of 
 " trial under the difficulties in which we are placed ; a time 
 "which may be one of much greater trial iinder the remedies 
 "which we shall be called upon to endure. Nobody can 
 " deny that the action of the House of Commons has been 
 " and I fear we may expect that it will be greatly im- 
 " peded by monstrous interruptions ; but let us beware lest, 
 " in endeavouring to deliver ourselves from the tyranny of 
 " lawless and irregular members of the assembly, we hand 
 " ourselves over to a worse tyranny the tyranny of a 
 " Minister of the day. / look with no uneasiness to the 
 " ultimate result of the contest against those who endeavour 
 " to infringe our rules" Sir Stafford seemed, from this 
 passage, to have been let into the secret of the conspiracy. 
 He feared lest Englishmen should be carried, by passion, 
 along a false scent, and should fall under " the tyranny of 
 " a Minister of the day." That party government would 
 be put down, he saw full well. But what would take its 
 place ? The despotism of one man, under the name of 
 Prime Minister ? or the rule of the Sovereign in Council ? 
 That doubt was the cause of his anxiety. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone kept up the ball at the City, on Oct. 1 3 : 
 "Although, as I have said, the half-century upon which, 
 " for the moment, I am looking back, has been distin- 
 " guished by an unexampled profusion of labour in the 
 " public service, it has also been remarkable, especially at 
 " its close, for a state of facts which demands your atten- 
 " tion, and the attention of the whole country namely, 
 " that never, at any period of our history, have the legisla- 
 " tion and general business of the country been felt to be in 
 " a state so lamentably in arrear. . . . The cause is that the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 257 
 
 " state of augmented demand has been taken advantage of 
 " by persons not so loyal as they ought to be, to the fair 
 " fame of that legislative assembly to which they belong 
 " an assembly of which I will venture to say that, long as 
 " I have sat in the House of Commons, I have never until 
 " lately known the time when every one of its members 
 " did not look upon the traditions of that House, upon the 
 " fame of that House, upon its efficiency in the discharge 
 " of its duties, with a feeling of filial as well as patriotic 
 " affection, and when he did not regard his share in those 
 " traditions as among the most precious portions of his own 
 " personal inheritance. But we have come to a time when, 
 " if the House of Commons is to continue worthy of that 
 " place in public confidence and esteem in which it has 
 " been hitherto held, it will have to address itself in a bold 
 "and a manful spirit to consider how either by more stringent 
 " and effective rules, or by A JUDICIOUS DEVOLUTION OF 
 "DUTIES, or perhaps in its wisdom it may think best by both 
 " of these means it may place itself in a condition of re- 
 " newed capacity. . . . With regard to local government 
 " in Ireland, after what I have said of local government in 
 "general, and its immeasurable benefits, and of the manner 
 " in which Parliament is at present overcharged by too 
 " great a centralization of duties, you will not be surprised 
 "if I say that / for one will hail with satisfaction and 
 "delight any measure of local government for Ireland, or for 
 " any portion of the country, provided only that it conform 
 "to this one condition, that it shall not break down or 
 "impair the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament" 
 
 On the Lord Mayor's day, * he again prepared the minds 
 of the people of England for the great coup he was medi- 
 tating against the House of Commons. In reading his 
 words, a light is thrown on his previous action, or rather 
 his inaction, before the year 1874. We remember that, 
 while the House was always kept occupied with trivialities, 
 the Government evidently desired to avoid legislation on 
 1 Nov. 9, 1881.
 
 258 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 any pressing social questions. When Mr. McCullagh 
 Torrens (for example) was endeavouring to pass his Bill 
 for providing better dwellings for the working classes, Mr. 
 Gladstone never raised his voice to assist him, nor ever 
 remained to give his vote in support of him. Afterwards 
 the Mines Act was allowed to be spoiled ; the Conspiracy 
 Bill was made ridiculous ; and scores of Bills were per- 
 mitted to drop, because Mr. Gladstone forbore to render 
 any assistance in improving and passing them. Bearing all 
 this in mind, let us read his speech of Nov. 9, iSSi : " Par- 
 " ticular measures of legislation may be the subject of dif- 
 " ferences of opinion among us ; but there is one subject 
 " on which there can be no difference of opinion, and that 
 "is the subject of the dignity and the efficiency of the 
 " legislative body itself. My Lord Mayor, there is no dis- 
 "guising the matter, there is no denying that the time 
 "has come when circumstances not the mere views of a 
 " Minister or a Government but circumstances, plain and 
 " undeniable as the sun in the heavens, challenge the people 
 " of England and the people of these three countries to 
 "determine whether it is their wish or whether it is not 
 " their wish that tJte House of Commons sJwuld prove itself 
 " adequate to the great duties it has to perform. . . . There 
 " will be, my Lord Mayor, as I believe, an early and very 
 " urgent demand upon the wisdom of the representative as- 
 " sembly to consider of effective means to meet this great evil ; 
 "and what I would humbly ask of this assembly, without 
 " the slightest distinction of party, is that this question may 
 "be kept out of the region of party disputes. It is no 
 11 interest of party. ... I claim that the settlement of 
 "this question, when it shall come forward, shall not be 
 " regarded as an interest of party or of the Administration 
 "of the day, but as a national interest, an imperial interest, 
 " to which it is the duty of every one of us to address his 
 " mind ; in the very same spirit of patriotic devotion, which 
 " he would show if an enemy were landing on our shores, 
 " or if the principles of disorder threatened the institutions
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 259 
 
 " which you, my Lord Mayor, have so justly commended 
 to-night." 
 
 Sir Richard Cross, the late Home Secretary, was selected 
 to reply to that speech. On Tuesday, Nov. 1 5, he delivered 
 his reply, at Warrington. He said : " And now that leads 
 " me to a subject that I venture to say is of very great im- 
 " portance, because we are now told, on the authority of 
 " the Prime Minister himself, that, in consequence of this 
 " obstruction, the first business which Parliament is to be 
 " invited to undertake is the reform of the procedure of the 
 " House of Commons. . . . And first, I must willingly 
 " state I do not think from the bottom of my heart that 
 " this ought to be a party question. The Prime Minister has 
 " made an appeal more than once to us that it should be 
 "treated absolutely impartially. He has said that it is a 
 " national question, that it is an imperial question, and, as 
 " such, I am perfectly willing to treat it. ... There is 
 "no doubt there have been men who, at all times and 
 "seasons, have made it their business in every possible 
 " way, to impede the business of the House of Commons, 
 " whether for right or for wrong, and simply to put a stop to 
 " it. I say honestly that all such wilful obstruction itself 
 " should be obstructed, that all wilful stopping of the 
 " business of the House of Commons ought to be stopped, 
 " and that all wilful perversion of the forms and procedure 
 " of the House, for any such end, ought to be punished. 
 ' But it is the man that does it who ought to be punished. 
 " You are not to alter the rules of the House, because a few 
 "do some wrong; but you are to punish tlie man who abuses 
 " the rules that are made. . . . I only want to lay 
 "down a canon by which they should be guided ; and that 
 " is, you must make your rules for those people who really 
 "want them ; you must not make a possible, or even a 
 "probable abuse by some, the measure of tJte liberty which 
 "all ought to have. . . . But then I am perfectly 
 " startled by the views which have been brought forward, 
 " in the last few days, by the member for Birmingham, Mr.
 
 260 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Chamberlain, a man who has not been in Parliament for 
 "any length of time. He says that the procedure of the 
 " House is wholly to be remodelled ; he says that the obstruc- 
 " tion, the wilful obstruction, is only a very small part of the 
 " matter with which we have to deal. ... If tlie Govern- 
 " ment choose to take it up in that spirit, and think that 
 " members will sit down the moment they are called upon, 
 "without saying another word, I, as representative of a 
 " great constituency, say that so long as I am saying what 
 " I have a right to say, as long as I keep within the rules, 
 " not transgressing or abusing the rules, so long as I am 
 "exercising my rights legitimately and honestly, then I 
 " shall maintain that I, as your representative, have a riglit 
 11 to speak and if you are going to frame rules so that a 
 "tyrannical majority may stop the mouth of a member 
 " who wants to say what he has a right to say, I for one 
 " will oppose it. ... The time may come when the 
 " House of Commons may have to stand up strongly and 
 " firmly against the power of the Crown exercised by the 
 "responsible Minister of the day; and I say that any arbi- 
 " trary Minister, to whatever side he belongs, backed up 
 " by a tyrannical majority, would work injustice to one of 
 "yotir most valued institutions" 
 
 No. XLI. 
 
 LEST the speech of Sir R. Cross should have turned the 
 tide against Mr. Gladstone's proposals, it was arranged that 
 Lord Hartington should make a rejoinder in Lancashire. 
 He did so on Dec. 18. It will be observed, on reading his 
 speech, that Lord Hartington pointed to a most drastic 
 measure : no more questions to be asked of Ministers ; no 
 more representments of grievances before Supply ; urgency 
 to be established in Supply itself ; the stages of considera- 
 tion of Bills to be reduced ; and so forth. And not only 
 this. He pointed also to local government to a species 
 of Home Rule (the business to be done by Grand Com-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 261 
 
 inittees of the House) ; and then he informed his hearers 
 that he was not in the inner Cabinet, but was only speak- 
 ing to order. He said he was speaking, " not as a member 
 " of the Government, whose decision upon this subject I do 
 " not yet know." That is, the session is again to be " the 
 " work of one man " Mr. Gladstone ! Clearly, we must 
 have, in future, either government by the Privy Council, or 
 else a "one-man despotism." The following was his speech: 
 " I should like to say two or three words upon the con- 
 " dition, the present condition, of business in the House 
 " of Commons, and on the necessity for some reform of the 
 " procedure of Parliament. . . . It is simply whether 
 " the country cares to have any of those great legislative 
 " reforms, for which it voted at the last election, carried into 
 " execution during the duration of the existing Parliament 
 "or not. There is the question of local government, 
 "and, connected with it, the difficult question of local 
 " taxation. . . . But to go to other measures. Do you 
 " care still, as you cared two years ago, about a thorough 
 " reform of the land laws a reform of our land system 
 " which will make the land less of a monopoly in the hands 
 "of the few than it is now? And again, do you care, as 
 " you cared two years ago, that the county franchise should 
 " be assimilated to the borough franchise, and that that 
 " measure should be accompanied by a redistribution of 
 " seats ? Do you care, as some of you cared two years ago, 
 " that the question of the restriction of intemperance and 
 " the reform of the licensing laws should be dealt with or 
 " not ? If you want any of those things done, I have no 
 " hesitation in saying that the first thing to do is to reform 
 " the existing procedure in Parliament. Every one of these 
 " subjects offers itself especially the question of Parlia- 
 " mentary reform to an immense extent to the proceedings 
 " of Parliamentary obstruction. There is not one of them 
 " which does not present a variety of sides open to attack, 
 " and which the opponents of every kind will be able to 
 " avail themselves of under our existing system, and which,
 
 262 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " under the obstructive proceedings which have recently 
 " been brought to so great a perfection, may not be 
 " successfully obstructed. . . . It is easier to point to 
 " the great evils which now exist, than to point to the 
 " remedy which is to be found for them. / hope that the 
 " remedy may not necessarily be of a stringent or of a coercive 
 " character. I doubt not that something may be done by the 
 " adoption of the principle of the subdivision of labour, and 
 " that some way may be found by which committees of the 
 " House may relieve the House itself from a great part of 
 " the labour ^vJlich it noiv thinks it necessary to undergo. In 
 "speaking my own opinion as a member of Parliament, 
 "and not as a member of the Government, whose decision 
 " upon this subject I do not yet know, I may say I am of 
 " opinion that no remedy will be found adequate, which 
 " does not give to the House, and to a majority of the 
 " House, far greater powers than it now possesses, for the 
 " purpose of disposing of its own time, and of deciding 
 " what subjects it will discuss, and at what length it shall 
 " discuss them. . . . The stake at issue is no small one. 
 " The House of Commons is the mainspring of our institu- 
 " tions. It is the most important part of our system of 
 "government. It is of cardinal, of vital importance to 
 " the interests of this country, that the House of Commons 
 " should not lose any part of the fame and dignity which 
 " it has enjoyed for many centuries. I fear, under present 
 " circumstances, it is rapidly losing some part of that 
 " fame and that dignity which it has hitherto enjoyed." 
 
 In returning thanks, immediately afterwards, for a vote 
 of confidence, he again enforced the idea of the previous 
 speech that the palavering power of Parliament must be 
 abolished, and its functions parcelled out among local 
 bodies throughout the kingdom. 
 
 " It really is quite impossible for me to say what it may 
 " be possible for the Government to do, either in the next 
 "session or in immediately ensuing sessions. That depends 
 " upon what the Government may be able to do, and what
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 263 
 
 " Parliament may be willing to do in regard to that ques- 
 " tion on which I have already touched this evening 
 " namely, the simplification and reform of its proceedings. I 
 " do not think we shall be able to make much progress in the 
 " discussion of any of these questions, so long as we are obliged 
 " to work tinder the present unsatisfactory system. I hope it 
 " will be possible for us this year to reform our procedure." 
 Lord Hartington held out a bait to almost every class of 
 the community, to induce them to concur with Mr. Glad- 
 stone in revolutionizing the procedure of Parliament. To 
 those who clamoured for decentralization, an extension of 
 local government ; to the farmers, a reform of the land laws 
 in England and Scotland ; to the Radicals, a reduction of 
 the county franchise, and the redistribution of seats among 
 electoral divisions ; to the followers of Sir Wilfrid Lawson, 
 a crusade against drink. On the 28th December, 1 Mr. 
 Gladstone found it necessary to enforce this argument on 
 the tenant farmers of England (who are the supporters of 
 the Conservative leaders, and who probably had begun to 
 make an outcry in the line which Sir R. Cross had taken 
 up). He seized the opportunity, also, for hinting that his 
 measure would go far beyond mere useful modification of 
 the Practices of the House of Commons. The following 
 was Mr. Gladstone's letter : 
 
 " u, Downing Street, Whitehall, December 28. 
 
 " Sir, I am directed by Mr. Gladstone .to acquaint you 
 " that he has received the resolutions which were passed 
 "at a meeting of tenant farmers recently held at Aberdeen, 
 "and also the memorial which accompanied them. He can 
 " assure you that Her Majesty's Government are sensible of 
 "the importance of wise reforms in the land laws ; but the 
 "time for considering such reforms must greatly depend 
 " upon the measures which may be adopted by the House 
 " of Commons for tlie more effectual despatch of its business. 
 " I am, your obedient servant, E. W. HAMILTON." 
 
 The time was drawing nigh for the re-assembling of 
 1 St. James's Gazette, Dec. 31, 1881.
 
 264 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Parliament. The heat of the agitation had therefore to be 
 increased. All the demagogic stokers and political firemen 
 had to be set to work to rake up the furnaces of agitation. 
 On the 5th of January it was Mr. Chamberlain's turn. He 
 was ordered to speak in favour of the cloture, and to put it 
 on ultra-Radical grounds. " The first figl it, and I am not 
 certain it may not be the chief fight, will come over that 
 " question about reform of tlte House of Commons. . . . 
 " How long are the nation, the great majority of the people, 
 " who are anxious for steady, intelligent, and constitutional 
 " progress how long will they endure, having bided their 
 " time for the constitutional opportunity, after having 
 " declared emphatically and expressly their sovereign will 
 " and pleasure, that these shall be frustrated, set at nought 
 " by the adroit use of Parliamentary forms which is made 
 " by the representatives of a defeated minority ? If this 
 "sort of thing is to go on, it appears to me that Repre- 
 " sentative Government will become an absolute farce. The 
 " primary object of a Parliamentary assembly is, in my 
 " opinion, to carry out the decisions at which the nation 
 "has arrived. . . . During these last two or three 
 " years, that pressure of the House of Commons, that tacit 
 " expression of its will has ceased to have the slightest effect, 
 " and I say, therefore, that it is absolutely necessary that 
 "some substitute must be found for zY, unless the House of 
 " Commons is to become the laughing-stock of the country, 
 " and unless it is to be an instrument for choking the 
 " machinery of the Government, and of bringing all legisla- 
 " tion to a standstill. This is the real question of the mo- 
 " ment, the question of the greatest importance. It is all very 
 '' well, but I must candidly tell you it is a mere work of 
 " supererogation for Liberal meetings and Liberal associ- 
 " ations to pass resolutions, inviting the attention of the 
 " Government to reforms which they think to be urgent, 
 " unless you are prepared to put your gloves on, and do 
 "strenuous battle in order to secure a reformation of t/t 
 " House of Commons"
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 This speech, which was intended to forward the ques- 
 tion, by fanning the agitation, in reality served only to give 
 a shock to the minds of many good, but phlegmatic persons. 
 The newspapers of the 7th reflected the feelings of the 
 country, and yet tried to turn these feelings to account in 
 favour of the Government The Times likened Obstruction 
 to the " Parliamentary Temple- Bar," which (it said) must be 
 " removed. But (it added) obviously the Government will 
 " be very ill-advised if it should attempt to follow the prac- 
 " tice of some Metropolitan authorities, who break up an 
 " important thoroughfare, just at the time when the pressure 
 " of traffic is at its height. The question of wilful Obstruc- 
 " tion is really entirely distinct from that of the procedure ot 
 " the House of Commons. The forms of the House have 
 " not hitherto been found inconsistent with a rate of legisla- 
 " tion quite as rapid as the feeling of the country desired. 
 " . . . The first step clearly must be to strike at the root of 
 " Obstruction itself. Obstruction is the work of individual 
 " members of Parliament, who can be punished for their 
 " offences. If the existing penalties are not severe enough, 
 " their severity must be increased. If individual members 
 " abuse the forms of the House, the primary remedy is, not 
 " to change the forms, but to punish the abuse." It then 
 turned this feeling to the account of the Government, by 
 admitting that there are some forms and practices which 
 do waste time, and should be reformed ; and by finally pro- 
 posing that the work of the House should be divided up 
 among large committees. That is, it proposed that Home 
 Rule should be extended piecemeal to the whole kingdom. 
 
 The Standard regarded the cloture as "peremptorily 
 "checking the legitimate privileges of the Opposition. 
 " . . .If the Opposition is to be extinguished, in however 
 "discreet and modified a fashion, one of the guarantees 
 " of Parliamentary Government will disappear. . . . The 
 "Minister says to the House of Commons, 'Sign a blank 
 " ' cheque, and we will fill in the amount." They go further 
 " than this, and insist upon having a power for which there
 
 266 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "is no precedent in our political history." The Morning 
 Post said it would " enable the leader of the majority to 
 "silence opposition." The Daily News (Radical organ) 
 argued in favour of the bare majority having the power 
 to close a debate as soon as it should think fit, so that 
 the leader of the House should not " be driven to continual 
 " negotiations with the leader of the Opposition? The Daily 
 Telegraph saw in Mr. Chamberlain's speech, and in his 
 advocacy of the cloture, " a domineering spirit ; " and said 
 that " he paraded a superb contempt for the rights of minor- 
 " ities." The Spectator (Radical weekly) argued that " in 
 " giving the House of Commons the right of closure of talk 
 " by an ordinary majority, there need be no special pressure 
 "on the rights of minorities." The Prime Minister was to 
 " announce beforehand " how much time he would allow 
 for any debate. The power of "squeezing down talk " (it 
 said) must clearly be given only "to the Minister of the 
 "day," who alone is sufficiently "master of the situation." 
 
 The mind of the country had evidently received a great 
 shock (if the country may, by metaphor, be said to have a 
 mind), and men's opinions were generally adverse to Mr. 
 Gladstone's plan. The Radicals alone supported it. On 
 the Qth, the Morning Post seemed .to be veering round ; 
 it merely doubted whether the good of the cloture would not 
 be outweighed >by its hurtfulness. The Liverpool Courier 
 feared that the "popular idol," Mr. Gladstone, had "passed 
 " the boundary-line of discretion in committing himself to 
 " the cloture. It is an extreme measure ; it is abhorrent to 
 " the national genius and prejudices. . . . The advo- 
 "cates of the cloture are forcing a French tyranny on the 
 " English Parliament, in reckless disregard of the senti- 
 " ments of the people ; and, in the name of Liberty, are 
 "aiming a fatal blow at Parliamentary freedom" The 
 Daily Neivs, in its vituperating rage, shrieked that the 
 Conservative party, " the Levites of the Constitution," were 
 making "common cause with the Irish Obstructionists." 
 It was true that Mr. D'Israeli had done so ; and true also
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 267 
 
 that Mr. Gladstone had done so. The fallacy of the Daily 
 News consisted in attributing to the party, the motives and 
 acts of its leader. On the loth, the Liverpool Courier could 
 find " no necessity or justification for the clottire" which it 
 regarded as a " sweeping revolution," a " novel principle," 
 " an instrument of coercion in the hands of Ministers," and 
 " despotism in its purest essence." The Western Morning 
 News mourned, " We are now about to curtail liberties 
 "which have been the foundation of our Parliamentary life. 
 "The necessity is admitted, and the urgency is confessed." 
 Yet it added, "The fall of the House of -Commons from 
 " liberty would be a catastrophe." 
 
 The suddenness of the proposal that debates should be 
 closed by the vote of a mere majority, was that which 
 had given a shock to men's minds throughout the country. 
 Very few looked back, and asked themselves what 
 necessity there was for reforming the rules at all ; and 
 still fewer looked forward to consider the effect of adopt- 
 ing such a proposal. That the proposal was suddenly 
 adopted, was evident from the fact that it did not come 
 prominently forward until the autumn of 1881, when it 
 was at once rapidly pushed to the front. As to the 
 necessity for it, few remembered that the obstruction of 
 the four years previous, to 1881, had been far greater, and 
 more persistent, than it was in that year ; and yet the evil 
 of such a proposal was, during those four years, always 
 held to be greater than the evil of obstruction itself. How 
 then, when the obstruction had decreased, and almost 
 vanished, could it be said .that the evil of the cloture had 
 become less than the evil of obstruction ; nay that the 
 distance between the two evils had become so immeasur- 
 able, that the cloture had risen into an apotheosis of 
 necessity? In 1881, the only Bill which met with any 
 obstruction was the Coercion Bill ; and the resistance to 
 that bill was not so much obstruction, as legitimate 
 opposition; So much for the absence of necessity which 
 is perceived on looking back. Fewer still looked forward,
 
 268 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 and saw, in the measure, the destruction of the ancient 
 freedom of speech in the House of Commons ; and no 
 one detected in it the action of conspirators against 
 Parliamentary Government, and against the Protestantism 
 of the Monarchy and the British Constitution. With 
 such a weapon in his hand, a Minister could repeal the 
 Act of William and Mary. 
 
 A few Irishmen suborned for the purpose, say you ? 
 have triumphed over the House of Commons, and com- 
 pelled the rules of glorious centuries to be abolished ; say 
 you so ? Do you say that they will always triumph ? Do 
 you suppose that they will always care to obstruct ? Are 
 you, year by year, to bring in Coercion Bills for Ireland, 
 in order to give them a plea and pabulum for Obstruction ? 
 Much better would it be to send that handful of Irishmen 
 to the Tower, and preserve your ancient House of Com- 
 mons, than keep your Irishmen and lose your liberties. 
 So any man of common sense would have argued. Not 
 that the House of Commons is a good legislative machine. 
 Far from it. Its proper function is the statement of wants 
 or grievances, and the voting of supplies. Let it, by all 
 means, return to its proper function, then. What I object 
 to, is, the endeavour to create light, by opposing darkness 
 to darkness ; instituting a conspiracy in order to remove 
 an abuse. 
 
 In the United States, and other foreign Representative 
 Assemblies, the cloture can work, because these assemblies 
 are not legislative machines. Bills are not framed by the 
 Assembly, but by Committees or Bureaux, who sit with 
 closed doors. It is the Committee, not the House, which 
 shapes the legislation. With us, the idea of legislation, or 
 projet de loi, begins (as a general rule), with the Executive 
 Government, and the idea is worked out, in a Government 
 office, by Sir Henry Thring. When the representative of 
 some interest or community desires legislation, he proposes 
 a resolution in the House ; and then, if he gets a majority, 
 he leaves the Government to give effect to it. Now the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 269 
 
 Executive Government, when it brings in a Bill, stakes 
 its existence on pushing it through the House, and 
 preserving all its clauses. In doing so, it is assisted by 
 hundreds of obedient members who have never even 
 looked at the Bill. Thus the Bill is passed in its entirety, 
 unless the consent of the Executive be given to any 
 alteration. But the consent of the Government to an 
 alteration cannot be obtained, except by means of a 
 thorough discussion in the House. Such a discussion is 
 irksome to the Minister in charge of the Bill, who assumes 
 beforehand that he is right, and that every one who differs 
 from him must be wrong. It is solely because of this self- 
 sufficient assumption, that a discussion, in which many 
 members reiterate and urge the same point, is absolutely 
 necessary. 
 
 The doture, on the other hand, will enable the Minister 
 to give effect to his self-sufficient assumption, and to 
 say beforehand : " Ye are all ignorant ; I have made a 
 " good Bill for you, and you cannot know, as well as I do, 
 " the true state of the case ; nevertheless, I will give you 
 " two hours' indulgence for amusing yourselves by foolish 
 " discussion, to which, of course, I will pay no sort of re- 
 " gard." The Minister then will fold his arms, set his face, 
 and sit out the two weary hours of talk. Say that an hour 
 and fifty minutes have passed. A member rises, and begins 
 to show glaring faults and absurdities in the Bill. " Thank 
 " Heaven the two hours have passed by," sighs the 
 Minister. The Bill is enacted, and the House of Commons, 
 not the Minister, is responsible for the errors and absur- 
 dities. If the Bill were framed by a Council, where 
 secresy excluded bunkum, and where the oath and the 
 signature of each councillor precludes party spirit, a good 
 law might be framed, and the councillors would be 
 responsible to the country. Then the country would 
 point out any hardships, by a representation of grievances, 
 in the House of Commons before Supply. 
 
 The country having shown, by the daily journals, that
 
 270 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 its mind was moving adversely to the measure, it behoved 
 Mr. Gladstone himself to step down into the arena. On 
 Jan. 13, he spoke at Hawarden. After pointing out many 
 hardships, and exaggerating many grievances which 
 pressed upon farmers, (which he styled " the very serious 
 " evils from which you have suffered,") he said that the 
 rules of the House of Commons stood in the way of all 
 reform. Alter the rules as I suggest, (said he, in fact,) and 
 you shall find ease, and happiness to your souls. He used 
 the following words : 
 
 " Now these are all matters, gentlemen, which, in the 
 " opinion of Her Majesty's Government, deserve and call 
 " for great attention. The mode of meeting the public 
 " emergencies in these matters is much too complicated a 
 " business for me to enter upon at the present moment. 
 " We are devoting our attention to it with all our energy, 
 " and we hope to bring it under the early attention of 
 " Parliament. I say the early attention of Parliament, 
 " because we are obliged now, if we speak of introducing 
 " anything into Parliament, to speak with great reserve, 
 " inasmuch as you know that the forms of Parliament 
 " have of late been used for purposes the very reverse of 
 " those for which they were intended. They were intended 
 "for the purpose of providing and effecting such legis- 
 lation. They are used very much for the purpose of 
 ." preventing any legislation at all. The matter is, I may 
 " say, of such magnitude that Her Majesty's Government 
 " will have to deal with it in the coming session. Before 
 " bringing on great legislative measures of reform, it will 
 " be necessary to put the House of Commons in a condition 
 " satisfactorily to perform its duties." 
 
 The Standard (January 16), advanced a curious argu- 
 ment. Obstruction (it said) is a disease, or rather a 
 symptom of an internal disorder. The "best men" no 
 longer care to speak in the House; and no speeches in 
 the House have any extended influence. If a good man 
 has anything to say, he holds a meeting. The real dis-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 271 
 
 cussion of political affairs is on the platform, and then in 
 the press. Wherefore it is hardly worth while to adopt 
 the cloture, or even to remove obstruction. " The cloture 
 " would not affect the circumstances from which the House 
 " of Commons is really suffering ; the growth of rival 
 " institutions dividing with it the fame and popularity 
 "which were formerly all its own." The natural con- 
 clusion to such reasoning is this : The House of Commons 
 is not worth preserving ; give free play to its mortal 
 disease, and let it die. 
 
 No. XLII. 
 
 AT the beginning of the year 1882, the opposition to the 
 cloture seemed to be growing. The Conservative party 
 was gradually consolidating itself against " very extreme 
 " measures." The Irishmen would be, of course, compelled, 
 by their constituents, to resist it. The Times of January 
 17 therefore informed us that those "Irish suspects" 
 who were M.P.'s, would not be released from gaol for the 
 meeting of Parliament. We may suppose Mr. Gladstone 
 to have said, in effect : " Yet the Irish members who are 
 " not in prison may be of service to the great cause. 
 " They may stop all progress, ab initio, by moving a series 
 " of resolutions one for each of the 500 suspects in gaol. 
 " This would be a great scandal ; and yet it would be in 
 " accordance with the avowed intention, when that famous- 
 "clause in that very Irish Coercion Bill, under which the 
 "suspects were arrested, was laid before the House of 
 " Commons. This enormous scandal will serve to put so 
 " much pressure on the House of Commons, that, in des- 
 " peration, they will all vote for the proposed alteration of 
 " rules. Such a resort to the old tactics is necessary ; for 
 "the Times article of January 18 is against the cloture ; 
 " and the Earl of Zetland, Earl Grey, and the eldest son of 
 "the Marquis of Ripon have openly left the Liberal ranks, 
 "on account of the dark and mysterious policy of the 
 " Government. There are also many signs which fore-
 
 272 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "shadow the removal of old party landmarks, and the 
 " defection of many more men of note. The two parties 
 "are already dead. A new national party must arise." 
 So we may suppose Mr. Gladstone to have spoken his 
 thoughts in the Cabinet meeting. Those thoughts were 
 reflected in the Times (January 18) in an article, which 
 concluded by enumerating dangers and difficulties in the 
 political world, at home and abroad, and by suggesting a 
 back-door of escape for Mr. Gladstone : " It would be un- 
 " wise to add to all these dangers, the bitterness that would 
 " be engendered, among Liberals as well as Conservatives, 
 " if the Ministerial majority, morally weakened by signifi- 
 " cant defections, were to impose the cldture, in its crudest 
 " form, upon the House of Commons." 
 
 The next day the Daily News produced an article in 
 favour of " cldture by a simple majority," saying : " The 
 " Government (in 1881) asked for Urgency for Supply, but 
 " was refused, although a large majority voted for it, and 
 " the urgent necessity at the moment was obvious and great." 
 As the event proved, there was no urgent necessity at all ; 
 and Supply was got through with an unexpected and un- 
 exampled rapidity and ease. The refusal of the House 
 was therefore the means of saving Parliament, at that time, 
 from an unexpected restriction of its freedom of debate ; 
 while the proposal of the cloture, and the assumption of 
 great urgency, revealed the conspiracy against the House, 
 which was being carried on. 
 
 On January 22, Sir VV. Harcourt was sent down to 
 Burton-on-Trent, to continue the agitation in favour of the 
 cloture. He argued that the best way to restore liberty to 
 the House of Commons, which was then dominated by the 
 Irish members, was to curtail its liberty of speech ; and 
 that the ancient privilege of freedom of discussion would 
 be most effectively secured by gagging the minority alto- 
 gether. Sir William was always a funny fellow. The 
 following was literally his argument : 
 
 " No. This Parliament has got a great deal of work which
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 273 
 
 ' it ought to do, and which it will do, I hope, before it has 
 " done ; and when that work is done will be the time for 
 "the country to judge it and its performances. But if this 
 " work is to be done, you must have a machine capable of 
 " doing it. When you are going to reap a heavy harvest, 
 " you sharpen your scythes and look after your threshing 
 " machines. It is admitted on all hands that the House of 
 " Commons' apparatus is not now in good working order. 
 " I saw a speech the other day sensible and moderate, as 
 "his speeches always are made in Lancashire by my pre- 
 * decessor, the late Home Secretary, and even he admitted 
 " the necessity of the task. Well, even the Tories, with 
 " their light crops and they were very light crops could 
 " not manage to harvest them, and they came out with 
 " rules against obstruction. I supported those rules as far 
 " as they went, but I predicted that they would be ineffi- 
 " cient, and they have proved wholly ineffectual. The 
 " dilatory resources afforded by the present forms of the 
 " House to men who really seem to want to prevent busi- 
 "ness being done, are so inexhaustible that you cannot 
 " grapple with them by measures against individuals. . . . 
 " According to Parliamentary principle it is for the majority 
 " to decide every question. But if a minority are allowed 
 " to protract a discussion indefinitely, so as to prevent the 
 " majority deciding the question, the whole object of the 
 " Parliamentary system is defeated and destroyed. And 
 " then you will see it is the minority, and not the majority, 
 " that decides whether a measure is to pass or whether it is 
 " not to pass. Well, that is to destroy the whole system of 
 " Parliamentary Government. It is a form of Government 
 ' which no civilized or sensible nation has ever adopted. 
 " You may just as well allow a minority at an election to pro- 
 " tract the declaration of the poll so that no member could 
 " ever be elected. It is exactly the same thing. ... In 
 " a country with a free press and with political intelligence, 
 " discussion cannot be stifled in Parliament or out of it. 
 " What we demand is not to oppress minorities, but that 
 
 T
 
 274 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " minorities shall not be allowed to oppress and destroy 
 " the rights of majorities. Hitherto in the history of 
 " Parliament, by an honourable understanding, by a tacit 
 " acquiescence, the rule has been that a decision in a 
 " reasonable time should always be arrived at. Unhappily 
 "we can no longer depend upon that. Experience has 
 "shown that we cannot do so, and, therefore, we must 
 " make rules which shall carry out what has hitherto been 
 " the prescriptive usage of Parliament." 
 
 That political discussion may go on in the press, is un- 
 doubtedly true if the press is free. But, if the press is 
 not free ? if one newspaper is secured, in. the interest of the 
 Government, by means of early intelligence ? if another 
 paper belongs to a Radical member of the Cabinet ? and 
 so forth then how can free discussion go on in the press ? 
 Moreover, I do not accept what Sir Wm. Harcourt said 
 about the right of the majority to rule. What is the 
 majority? and what inherent right has it to rule? If 
 Brown, Jones, and Robinson say that two sides of a 
 triangle are together longer than the third side ; and if 
 a tinker, a tailor, an apothecary, and a plough-boy deny it, 
 then the latter party are the majority. Is the third side, 
 then, longer than the two other sides ? So again, if one 
 hundred and ten proletaires determine to take away land 
 and houses from the rightful owners, and if one hundred 
 owners object to it, on which side is the right ? Sir Wm. 
 Harcourt not only asserted that the right is always on the 
 side of the majority, whatever they may say or do, but 
 that the minority may not even raise their voices against 
 the injustice. He, as it were, said to the minority : " Shut 
 " up " which is the meaning of cloture. As long as a few 
 of the wisest in the land used to select the wisest of their 
 number to represent their grievances in Parliament, there 
 was little danger of the majority acting unjustly. Now, 
 however, every ignorant clown has a vote, and such 
 constitute the majority. They do not even pretend to 
 elect the wisest or most honourable. They vote for
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 275 
 
 the one who gives most beer or sovereigns. Thus the 
 majority of the elected representatives are pretty sure 
 to be wrong, and to act unjustly, and to take away pro- 
 perty from the rightful owners, and hand it over to the 
 proletaires, that is, their constituents. Add to this evil 
 the new Radical organization of " the 200" and "the 300," 
 and you make matters worse. These " three hundred," 
 elected by the riff-raff of the place, plot and lay their stupid 
 scheming heads together, and manufacture a cry or watch- 
 word according to order; and then all the ignorant riff-raff, 
 who elected them, vote as they are told, and elect a " Re- 
 " presentative." The single principle of these persons is to 
 get themselves to the top to scramble up over the shoul- 
 ders and heads of those above them. In short, their aim 
 is bouleversement, or putting the bottom at the top, and the 
 top at the bottom. Further than this, the "three hundred" 
 merely act according to the orders of some central com- 
 mittee in London. Thus they become mere agents in 
 carrying out a great conspiracy, which has been hatched 
 by one, or by a very few unknown wire-pullers. That was 
 the rule to which Sir Wm. Harcourt would have us submit, 
 while he would also make us hold our tongues, and not cry 
 out for right and justice ! 
 
 The Daily News, of the 25th of January, published a 
 remarkable leader. A meeting of the Cabinet (it said) 
 was merely a gathering for political gossip. The Cabinet 
 never did any business. It, too, should be reformed. That 
 would be far better than a reform of Parliamentary pro- 
 cedure. All the Cabinet business was done (it said) " by 
 " a sort of informal inner Cabinet, consisting of three or 
 " four of the really vital members of the Government." 
 The rank and file of the Cabinet (it said) were merely 
 informed, a little earlier than the rest of the world, what 
 had been already decided on ! So said the Daily News. 
 He who dislikes the " personal Government " of one, a 
 one-man Government, so lately declaimed against by 
 Liberals he who fears the tyranny of a Triumvirate, let
 
 276 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 him then advocate a return to the Government of the 
 Sovereign in Council ! Honest Joe Covven, the member 
 for Newcastle, saw this plainly enough, as may be per- 
 ceived by any one who will read between the lines of his 
 speech, at Newcastle, on January 28, 1882. After urging 
 a return to the good old practice, namely, that the con- 
 stituencies should pay the entire costs of elections out of 
 their rates, and that all other expenditure should be pen- 
 ally visited, he said: " But while changes might be made 
 "easily and advantageously, it was to be hoped that no 
 " unnatural craving for legislation would tempt Parliament 
 " to surrender any of the rights of free discussion or any of 
 "the privileges of minorities. Majorities were often wrong, 
 " and nearly always exacting and intolerant. If any pro- 
 "posal was made to place in the hands of the majority (which 
 " would really be the hands of tJie Government), the power 
 "of closing a debate when Ministers pleased, it would be 
 " resisted by every means justified by honour and sanc- 
 "tioned by usage. To give such an arbitrary power to 
 " any majority whether Liberal, Conservative, or Radical 
 " would be to destroy the deliberative character of Parlia- 
 " ment, to unsettle legislation, and to decree the dictatorsJiip 
 " of the House. It would turn political contests, from hon- 
 " ourable struggles, into scrambles for office." 
 
 In this little bit, no less than four maxims appear. They 
 are indeed true maxims. How often has been quoted, 
 against the modern greed for legislation, the saying of 
 Tacitus : Plurimce leges, pessima Respublica ! How often 
 have we heard that majorities are more often wrong than 
 right ! Ay ! sometimes, in a fit of impatience, it is said 
 that majorities are always wrong ! How often have we 
 railed passionately, but truly, against the danger of the 
 dictatorship of a Prime Minister against the Prime 
 Minister putting himself in the place of the Crown ! 
 Parliament must be free to deliberate on the grievances 
 of the constituencies ; free to represent those grievances 
 to the Crown ; free to call Ministers to account for their
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 277 
 
 individual advice to the Crown ; free to deliberate on that 
 advice ; and free to address the Crown for an impeach- 
 ment of the Minister. But the law is above Parliament, 
 and cannot be touched by the House of Commons. Parlia- 
 ment can only declare the law, lest Parliament should be 
 too powerful and break it up. 
 
 As January drew to a close, and the period of the 
 opening of Parliament approached, Viscount Sherbrooke 
 (Robert Lowe) published, in the .Nineteenth Century, an 
 article on the cloture. He was merely swimming with the 
 stream, just ahead of the rest of the world. He, as a peer, 
 abused the House of Commons as a vulgar and degraded 
 body, with its habits and procedures which no gentleman 
 could tolerate. The fault of this, he asserted to be rooted 
 in the constituencies, that is, the people : " The member 
 "learns their language ; he adopts their views ; he accom- 
 " modates himself to their ideas. A man may be a model 
 " member if returned by one class of electors, who would 
 " be a pest and a nuisance if forced to seek the suffrages 
 "of another. It is vain to complain of the misconduct of 
 "the members of the House of Commons : they are what 
 "their constituents make them." He then dilated upon 
 " the false and dangerous lesson that it is by numbers and 
 " force, and not by reason and calm reflection, that the 
 " affairs of great communities are managed." He called 
 out loudly to the Conservatives to help in muzzling the 
 House of Commons. The only way of doing that (said 
 he) is the cloture, for it is, alas ! impossible to gag the 
 electorate. Lord Sherbrooke, in short, thought that the 
 whole Parliamentary system, whether you thus speak of 
 the country or the Legislature, had fallen into such a vio- 
 lent, impracticable state of anarchy, that it was time for all 
 
 parties to To do what ? As Lord Sherbrooke was 
 
 only swimming with the stream, he advised all parties to 
 confer dictatorial powers on the Minister of the day ! 
 O tempora ! O mores ! 
 
 Mr. W. H. Smith spoke, on January 30, at Exeter
 
 278 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Hall. He evinced an uncomfortable feeling that the 
 Liberal party had somehow laboured to bring about the 
 present crisis in the House of Commons ; that the fault 
 did not lie in the House of Commons itself, but in the 
 mot cTordre which had been given, by their leader, to the 
 obedient Liberal members ; and further, that the end and 
 aim of all this conspiracy was : " certain great constitutional 
 " changes which are impending" These were Mr. Smith's 
 words : " They were told that it was quite necessary that 
 "the majority should have the power of terminating de- 
 " bates at any time they might desire it. They were told, 
 " by the Prime Minister, that it was not possible tJiat 
 " Parliament should go on any longer under its present 
 " rules and regulations, which had served it for three hun- 
 " dred years in times of great trial and difficulty, when the 
 " liberty of the people was at stake. They had been told 
 " the other day by a Minister of the Crown that a better 
 " Parliament never existed. And here they had the sin- 
 gular phenomenon that, for the best Parliament that ever 
 " existed, for the largest majority ever wielded by a Prime 
 "Minister, they must have the cloture in order that the 
 "minority might be silenced, because they were told lately, 
 " by a Cabinet Minister, that great constitutional changes 
 " were impending" 
 
 The Government were not inclined to let the matter 
 rest, nor to allow the agitation to grow slack. The Under- 
 secretary for Foreign Affairs, Sir Charles Dilke, made a 
 speech, on January 31, at the Vestry Hall, Chelsea, in 
 which he said : " The forms of the House will sooner or 
 "later have to be dealt with in a twofold manner by 
 " repression of obstruction, and by delegation of duties to 
 "other bodies. The former is the more pressing want. 
 " That which Sir M. Hicks-Beach has called ' the worst 
 " ' Parliament which ever sat,' but which we know to be a 
 " gathering of unusually wise, patriotic, and able men, de- 
 " barred from doing the work they are met to do, will not, 
 " in my opinion, tolerate obstruction for many more weeks
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 279 
 
 " from now. Deadlock, they declare, shall end. The power 
 " to close debate is fully possessed by the Parliaments of 
 " Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the 
 "Netherlands, and Switzerland ; it is possessed in the 
 " form of a strong ' previous question ' by the Parliaments 
 "of Spain, of the United States, of Victoria, and of South 
 "Australia, and by one House (the Legislative Council) 
 " at the Cape. It has become necessary in this, as it has 
 " been in certain other matters, to follow the example of 
 " some of our own colonies, from whom we took the form of 
 " ballot we have adopted here. No one can seriously con- 
 " tend that we ought to be content to pass one important 
 " Bill a year, by sacrificing every other measure. As it is 
 "the duty, to use the words of Joseph de Maistre, of men 
 " as men to ask themselves the question, ' Wherein have I 
 "'advanced the general work ?' so it is the special duty of 
 " legislators to ask themselves that question." It must be 
 observed that, in the earlier part of his speech, Mr. Smith 
 " put the saddle on the right horse." He showed conclu- 
 sively that the obstruction had been caused, wilfully caused, 
 by Mr. Gladstone's own party. The Under-Secretary for 
 Foreign Affairs was then ordered to sound the country on 
 Mr. Gladstone's policy of granting Home Rule " the dele- 
 " gation of duties to other bodies." At the same time Mr. 
 Speaker was sent to Cottenham, near Cambridge, to in- 
 crease the agitation by the following words, delivered with 
 all the weight of a Speaker's authority. The Speaker con- 
 sidered that " he should be wanting in his duty to his con- 
 " stituents if on a subject of that character he was silent." 
 He further admitted that " the duty of the Speaker, as the 
 " servant of the House, was to see that the rules of tJie 
 " House were observed^ those rules being laid down by the 
 " House itself" Yet in the very next sentence he accused 
 himself of having disregarded the ancient rules of the 
 House, and framed rules himself for the conduct of the 
 House. The Speaker then proceeded to say, in explana- 
 tion of that violation of the rules of the House, during the
 
 280 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 last session, by the Speaker himself the time when he 
 suddenly interrupted and peremptorily closed a debate : 
 " On that very day last year there commenced a memor- 
 " able sitting of the House of Commons, in the course of 
 " which it became my duty to close a debate by interrupt- 
 " ing it and putting the question. I will not detain you 
 "by stating the reasons which induced me to take that 
 " step ; suffice it to say that I so acted because / knew that 
 " the integrity of Parliamentary Government was at stake, 
 " and therefore I did not hesitate in the course which I 
 "thought it my duty to pursue. What I did I did ad- 
 " visedly, and under like conditions I would do the same 
 " again. . . . The House at its next day's sitting con- 
 " ferred upon the Speaker unprecedented powers to frame 
 " rules for the conduct of the business of the House while the 
 " state of public business was urgent. Under those powers 
 " I accordingly framed certain rules, which proved effec- 
 " tual. However, they ceased to be operative when the 
 " state of urgency terminated, and they had no longer any 
 " vitality. ... It may not be generally known that the 
 " House has at present no power to close a debate, and under 
 " the existing rules the House is at the mercy of small mino- 
 " rities, who on various grounds desire to obstruct the pro- 
 " gress of business. The will of the House of Commons is 
 " expressed by its votes. . . . Neither the House nor the 
 " Speaker can close a debate on any question, as long as a 
 " member entitled to speak presents himself to address the 
 " House. / know of no power by which a debate may be 
 " brought to a close except by the act of the Sovereign, 
 "when Parliament is prorogued. Face to face with a 
 " grave crisis, / closed a debate last session, but the House 
 " has not as yet signified its pleasure as to the action of 
 " the Speaker, should a similar crisis occur. It was said 
 " that freedom of speech might be endangered, if the House 
 " assumes the power of closing a debate. Now, freedom of 
 " speech is the breath of the life of the Horise of Commons, 
 " and certainly I will be no party to putting it in peril.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 281 
 
 " But I am persuaded that the House, in its wisdom, may 
 " find the way of safeguarding liberty of speech, and of 
 "combining order with freedom of debate." 
 
 On February 7, the day of the assembling of Parlia- 
 ment, the leading journal had an article on the subject. 
 It "predicted with assured confidence" that the" Irish 
 " Irreconcilables " would again offer obstruction during the 
 Debate on the Address, and that " no loyal members of 
 " the House, whether they belonged to the Opposition or 
 " the Advanced wing of the Liberals, could unite with Mr. 
 " Parnell's adherents." The Times concluded by trusting 
 " that both the Constitutional parties would join, as they 
 " did twelve months ago, to defend the authority of Parlia- 
 " ment against open and implacable hostility." Not satis- 
 fied with the leading article, the Times also published an 
 " Analysis " of the number and length of sittings during 
 the last session ; the amount of time which had been con- 
 sumed after midnight ; the number of nights which had 
 been passed in each debate ; the durations and manner 
 of the obstructions ; the number of divisions, with the tale 
 of the minorities ; the number of the Speaker's interposi- 
 tions on points of order ; the number of questions asked ; 
 and the number of speeches made by various members. 
 It drew, certainly, a terrific and heart-rending picture, 
 enough to soften the most obdurate heart, and win the 
 most backsliding member, into following Mr. Gladstone 
 and voting for the cloture. 
 
 NO. XLIII. 
 
 ON the first evening of the sitting of Parliament, 1882, 
 Mr. Gladstone gave notice of his motions relative to the 
 procedure of Parliament. The first resolution placed the 
 power of cloture in the hands of the Speaker, or Chairman 
 of Committees, subject to a division, indeed, but without 
 discussion. During the last year, the cloture could be
 
 282 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 imposed, under the rules of Urgency, as long as the 
 urgency endured. It could then be imposed only by a 
 majority of three-fourths of the members present in the 
 House. The proposal of Mr. Gladstone, on February 7, 
 1882, was that a bare majority of one should impose it, 
 provided that more than 200 members supported it, or 
 less than 40 opposed it. Thus it might be imposed by 
 20 1 against 200 ; or by 40 against 39; or by 21 against 
 20 ; and so on. It was also proposed that the Speaker or 
 Chairman should have the power of curbing irrelevance 
 and repetition, by " ordering a member to discontinue his 
 "speech." The order of February, 1880, for the suspen- 
 sion of members by the Speaker or Chairman, was pro- 
 posed to be enlarged. The resolutions contained, also, 
 various other proposals for limiting the freedom of speech. 
 Moreover, it was proposed that the House should be 
 divided into great standing Committees, for the considera- 
 tion of certain classes of measures. 
 
 It was very apparent that the Ministerial party would 
 thus always have the power of stopping debate. At first 
 the Speaker or Chairman might, it was thought, be chary 
 of using the power ; but weariness, lassitude, and boredom 
 would soon assert their sway, and the resort to such an 
 easy escape from ennui would offer an irresistible temp- 
 tation. Moreover, the appetite would grow with the in- 
 dulgence of it, until discussion would reach a vanishing 
 point, and the House of Commons would have become a 
 thing of the past. Of course the Government would always 
 take care that a party man should be chosen for Speaker, 
 and another for Chairman of Committees. So it has been, 
 indeed, for some time. Those posts have always been 
 the rewards for assiduous services to a party. The last 
 Speaker, Brand, was the Liberal " whip," and performed 
 the coup d'etat in 1881. The former Chairman of Com- 
 mittees, Dr. Lyon Playfair, was Mr. Gladstone's Post- 
 master General, and we remember how he acted in 1881. 
 Party ties would, therefore, induce both Speaker and Chair-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 283 
 
 man to aid the Government in their distress ; and as 
 both these officials are always on chairs which they 
 cannot leave as long as the House sits, while members 
 of the Government may walk in and out of the House 
 when they please, it may be supposed that these officials 
 will always be the more ready to put a stop to discussion, 
 than even the Government itself would be. 
 
 Now let us consider how the Speaker or Chairman of 
 a Committee is to perceive that which, according to the 
 phraseology of the Rules, is called an "appearance" of 
 " the evident sense of the House." A number of members, 
 who, not being able to speak, have devised a substitute 
 for speech by making inarticulate noises and sounds most 
 brutish, such as miauwing, braying, and cock-crowing, inter- 
 spersed with one articulate sound, namely "D'vide, d'vide!" 
 they are the ones to make it " appear," to the Speaker, 
 that " the evident sense of the House " is in favour of an 
 immediate division. Under the new rule, the knot of 
 rustic members would become an organized department 
 of Government ; and the power of miauwing to perfection, 
 or braying to the life, would be the best qualification for a 
 seat in Parliament The Prime Minister will then tell the 
 whips to let Bedlam loose, as soon as a debate shall have 
 become inconvenient, or when he wants to dine out, or 
 when " an exposition of sleep " has come over him, and the 
 tumultuous storm of noises will at once make the " appear- 
 " ance of the evident sense " become manifest to the 
 Speaker. 
 
 The Speaker, moreover, and the Chairman of Com- 
 mittees, will also be of a different class of persons in 
 future. Up to this time, they have had no power or 
 authority of their own. They were but the organs of the 
 House ; and their duty was simply to see that the Rules 
 of the House were observed. In the future, they will be 
 invested with the most despotic powers. It did not matter, 
 before, what party bias they might have ; they could not 
 put it in action. From the passing of the Rules, it will be
 
 284 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 impossible for them to avoid acting in a party sense ; and 
 therefore their decisions, being no longer judicial, will no 
 longer be respected. 
 
 If it were merely the preservation of the ancient House 
 of Commons that was in question, we might have accepted 
 it in sorrow. If it were merely the freedom of speech, 
 and the liberties of the nation that were endangered, we 
 could have fought to the last to preserve them, and been 
 proud of a defeat in such a cause. But when we looked 
 forward and saw that as soon as these Rules should be fully 
 acknowledged, the Act of Settlement would be repealed, 
 and the voice of the country, in favour of the law of Wil- 
 liam and Mary and the Protestant succession, would be 
 stifled ; and a declared Romanist or tool of the Jesuits 
 might sit on the throne, and the Protestantism of the 
 country would be crushed under the heel of Papal des- 
 potism triumphant ; then the outlook filled us with horror, 
 and visions of the ruthless and bloody tyranny which 
 would quickly follow, distressed us. 
 
 That the aim was to extinguish discussion, and not 
 merely to put an end to obstruction, was sufficiently evi- 
 dent from the proposal itself. No minority, however large, 
 no regular Opposition, however respectable, would be able 
 in future to continue a debate which the Government dis- 
 liked ; 20 1 would be able to impose the cloture on 200. 
 As Ministers must, in the nature of things, be supported 
 by a majority (otherwise they cease to be a Ministry), it 
 followed that the Government would always be able to 
 silence the House whenever it should find it convenient. 
 
 The Morning Post, on February 9, saw with a pene- 
 trating insight, and gave expression to the truth. It 
 asserted that the new Rules were not directed against Irish 
 obstruction, but against English liberty. The Daily Tele- 
 graph, too, regarded the step as most " grave and perilous," 
 and predicted that the first rule alone would prove abso- 
 lutely fatal to the established character of the British 
 House of Commons, and would furnish the tombstone for
 
 CLUE JO THEIR SOLUTION. 285 
 
 the freedom of its debates. The Times, on various occa- 
 sions, pointed out that the cloture rule had been placed 
 first, and had been made a Cabinet question, so as to 
 coerce members into voting for it, under fear of a penal 
 dissolution, and loss of their seats (February n). It then 
 added these remarkable words : " The victory would only 
 " be gained by abasing the House of Commons in the eyes 
 " of the nation, and by dealing what might easily prove to 
 " be an irreparable blow to the stability and cohesion of the 
 " Liberal party '." 
 
 Little did the Times seem to perceive that these results 
 were the very ends which Mr. Gladstone had steadily kept 
 before him for many years ! It continued : " No one can 
 " doubt that this question of procedure, especially as re- 
 " gards the first rule, is the critical question of the session 
 " and a tiirning-point in tJie fortunes of the Liberal party. 
 " No one, who takes the trouble to inform himself of the 
 " drift of public opinion, can believe that the first rule, as 
 "it stands, has commended itself unreservedly to the judg- 
 "ment of any one. The real opinion of the country is 
 " not to be gathered from organs which follow their 
 " leader, whithersoever he goes, with undeviating fidelity, 
 "and without even taking time to form a judgment of 
 " their own." It concluded the leader in these words : 
 " If the cloture by a bare majority is proposed in any 
 "form, we shall give it our uncompromising opposition. 
 " As it now stands in the first rule, it is not only objec- 
 tionable, but ridiculous. We believe that the House 
 " of Commons already sees this. Sooner or later we are 
 " convinced that the country will see it. If the Cabinet is 
 " still blind, or if its chief is still inexorable, it is possible 
 " that they may have their way for the moment ; but they 
 " will assuredly degrade the House of Commons and not im- 
 " probably shatter the Liberal party? 
 
 Certainly ; but to " shatter the Liberal party " was 
 another of Mr. Gladstone's aims. We remember how he 
 worked for that end, year after year, and abandoned the
 
 28 S RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 party in 1874! Liberalism is disliked by Romanism, and 
 is the sworn enemy of the Jesuits. 
 
 The same day, the Morning Post printed in large type 
 the following letter from that talented Romanist Home 
 Ruler, Mr. O'Donnell. 
 
 " Sir, Allow me to state that the announcement in 
 "your columns of the intention of the Irish Parliamentary 
 " party to support Sir Stafford Northcote's opposition to 
 " Mr. Gladstone's proposed gagging of Parliament is at 
 " least premature. The Irish Parliamentary party is by 
 " no means as interested as you seem to suppose in the 
 " success of the Conservative leader's defence of English 
 " constitutional traditions. Mr. Gladstone's rules for the 
 " coercion of Parliament touch Irish national interests in 
 " the very smallest degree, and may very possibly promote 
 " the Irish carise to a variable extent 
 
 " The Liberal party is pledged to grant a measure of 
 " self-government to Ireland, which, as is to be seen from 
 " Mr. Gladstone's speech of yesterday, must, even if it 
 "stop short of Home Rule, remove so large a share of 
 " Irish business from the cognisance of the Imperial 
 " Parliament as to make the procedure of the Imperial 
 " Parliament a matter of comparative indifference to Irish- 
 " men. Besides, the Irish national movement depends no 
 "longer in any appreciable degree upon agitation in 
 " Parliament. The means at our disposal are very different 
 " to-day from what they were five years ago. It is even a 
 " matter of sincere satisfaction to many Irishmen that THE 
 " IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT is LIKELY TO BE BROUGHT 
 
 "DOWN TO THE LEVEL CONTEMPLATED BY THE LIBERAL 
 " CHIEFS. 
 
 " If our object be, as is frequently asserted, the destruc- 
 " tion of established institutions, the weakening of respect 
 "for monarchical and parliamentary authority, and the 
 "creation of forces and movements outside the Constitution, 
 "we are unable to see how such objects can be impeded,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 287 
 
 "if they are not greatly facilitated and advanced, by 
 "measures which will place the representation of Great 
 " Britain at tlie mercy of caucuses and ' committees of 
 "'selection,' organized wire-pulling, and the other contriv- 
 " ances which, as I have ventured to remind the House, 
 "have been adopted or adapted, by the ' Boss Kellys' of 
 " Birmingham, from the glories of Tammany Hall. 
 
 " As we can afford to be perfectly candid, and as we do 
 " not wish to labour under a misconception of our views, 
 " I beg English Conservatives, who have refused to help 
 " Irish freedom, now to concern themselves about English 
 "freedom without counting too confidently upon Irish 
 " assistance. 
 
 " I trust to your fairness to publish this necessary ex- 
 " planation, and I have the honour to remain, your obedient 
 " servant, 
 
 FRANK HUGH O'DONNELL." 
 
 It was very remarkable that the " machine " established 
 by Mr. Chamberlain before the elections of 1880, the 
 mainspring of which was in the hands of " the National 
 Federation of Liberal Associations," of Birmingham, 
 should have exerted itself to the utmost in favour of the 
 cloture. Was it endeavouring to extinguish the liberties 
 of England ? or had it been beguiled by Mr. Gladstone 
 and his friends ? Mr. Auberon Herbert, lately a Liberal 
 member, wrote an account of the manner in which this 
 political "hectograph" manufactured, reproduced, and 
 multiplied " public opinion." That process was under- 
 taken by the " machine " in favour of the cloture. It did 
 more ; it influenced members directly through their con- 
 stituencies. The Times of February 13, reproduced the 
 original decree of the National Liberal Federation. It 
 said : " The Government, have been placed in office by the 
 " Liberal party, in order that they may carry a series of 
 " measures, for which the country has long been waiting. 
 " It is only necessary to refer to the reform of county
 
 238 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " government, a revision of the land laws, and an extension 
 " of the franchise in counties, to all of which Mr. Glad- 
 " stone's Administration stands pledged, in order to show 
 " how essential it is that the power to obstruct public 
 " business in the House, which has of late years been so 
 " flagrantly abused, should be effectively checked. The 
 " Government have accordingly put into definite shape, 
 " and propose to give the force of authority to rules of 
 "procedure, by which, in the main, the House has, by the 
 " common consent of its members, been actually governed 
 " for many years past, which until a recent period have 
 " been honourably observed, and without which the busi- 
 " ness of a deliberative assembly cannot be carried on unless 
 " license in debate be prevented. Representation becomes of 
 " no effect, for, as we have seen, a small number of members, 
 " by persistently prolonging debate, can stop the progress 
 " of every important Bill. . . . Unless obstruction can be 
 " stopped there is no hope of obtaining these results, and 
 " unless the rules which the Government declare to be 
 " absolutely necessary for the conduct of public business 
 " are adopted, obstruction cannot be stopped, and, conse- 
 "quently, the legislative reforms upon which the Liberal 
 " party have set their hearts must be indefinitely delayed. 
 " It seems to us, therefore, imperative that the Liberal 
 " organizations throughout the country should, in the 
 strongest manner, and without a moment's delay, express 
 their determination that the whole strength of the Liberal 
 " party shall be put forth in support of the Government in 
 " this crisis." 
 
 The National Federation of the Liberal Associations 
 throughout the kingdom, thus placed a different issue 
 before us. The cloture was resorted to (it said), in order 
 to enable the Liberal Government to pass Radical 
 measures, which the Opposition would otherwise oppose. 
 This was a curious argument ! Party government was to 
 be done away with, not by the re-establishment of the 
 functions of the Privy Council, but by the extinction of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 the freedom of debate and the muzzling of all who should 
 venture to oppose ! The Newcastle Chronicle could well 
 exclaim : " A more direct and undisguised attack on the 
 " liberty of the British House of Commons never was 
 " made. It is not an amendment of procedure ; it is a 
 " direct and palpable subversion of liberty." 
 
 The " National Federation of Liberal Associations " of 
 Birmingham, the political " hectograph," at once wired the 
 word to all the local Liberal Associations, and set them 
 in motion, according to order. Every newspaper was 
 influenced, every member received his cahier, all society 
 was filled with whisperings, and rumours, and false 
 accounts, and fallacies, and specious arguments, to further 
 the scheme. The " machine " was at work, all over Eng- 
 land and Scotland, manufacturing " public opinion." The 
 Times of February 15 announced the resolutions which 
 had been passed at meetings, "convened in response to 
 " the circular issued on Saturday by the National Liberal 
 " Federation," by the Liberal Councils at Stoke, Clitheroe, 
 and Plymouth ; as well as the " Liberal Nine Hundred of 
 " Liverpool," the " Council of Manchester," and so forth. 
 The effect produced on members of Parliament may be 
 learned from an example given by Mr. Joseph Cowen, 
 M.P., the proprietor and London correspondent of the 
 Newcastle Chronicle (Feb. I5th). 
 
 " It is to be regretted that Liberal members have not 
 " more backbone and cannot muster courage sufficient to 
 " stand by their convictions, and take the consequences. 
 " One well-known member said to me, ' I hate the cloture 
 " ' and all its surroundings as strongly as you do. I have 
 " ' been many years in Parliament, have been in many a 
 "'minority, and I know from experience the domineering 
 "'disposition of all majorities, whether Liberal or Conser- 
 " ' vative ; but I do not wish to lose my seat. The local 
 " ' caucuses, with little knowledge of the question and no 
 " ' experience of the House, have passed resolutions in 
 " ' favour of the new plan, and I am not strong enough to 
 
 U
 
 290 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " ' fight them. Last year / sank my convictions to serve 
 "' my party, and voted for coercion. I consequently alien- 
 " ' ated the Irish element in my borough. If I were to 
 " ' lose the organized Liberals I might as well resign.' 
 " This is the sort of pressure that is being brought to bear 
 " on the more independent section of the Liberal party ; 
 " and it will succeed. But its success will be purchased at 
 " a heavy cost The member I refer to also observes : 
 " ' I smart under such despotism, and long for an oppor- 
 " ' tunity to break from it. There is despotism both outside 
 " l and inside Parliament. I may obey ; but the party can- 
 " ' not expect me to love them. I may vote for them, or I 
 " ' may abstain from voting ; but my services being forced, 
 " ' my own sense of justice being not only ignored but out- 
 " ' raged, I only give an outward and formal, but not a will- 
 " ' ing obedience to their behest.' If the Liberals who are 
 " using this pressure would consider, they would see that 
 " this course of policy is driving the party to destruction." 
 
 In truth, " the pressure which was being brought to bear 
 " upon avowed or suspected dissidents (from the cloture 
 "rule) was tremendous'' So said the Times of February 
 1 6. The National Federation of Liberal Associations, with 
 the authority of a " National Convention," dictated to the 
 thousand local caucuses, who, with Jesuitical obedience, 
 and Jesuitical acerbity, were quick to obey the behest, 
 which might have emanated from the Jesuit society. Such 
 was the Liberal machine for dictation and coercion, the 
 engine of the " enlightened " for the obfuscation of public 
 opinion, and the re-introduction of the Dark Ages. 
 
 All this was, however, considered necessary for "the 
 "expedition of business." The case was very "urgent." 
 There were a number of Liberal measures lying in various 
 pigeon-holes, and the Liberals were determined to pass 
 them while they were in power, lest they should never 
 attain to power again. Not a moment therefore was to be 
 lost. Every instant was of the greatest value to the Liberal 
 cause. But perhaps Mr. Gladstone had not the Liberal
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION.. 291 
 
 cause at heart ? Another cause was, perhaps, uppermost in 
 his mind ; while the Liberal uniform remained on his back 
 and the Liberal professions on his sleeve. Let us see. 
 The Peers good, quiet, humdrum politicians had not 
 much to do. They had been called together, and it was 
 necessary to find some pretence for meeting. Lord 
 Donoughmore, therefore, proposed that they should form a 
 committee for the consideration of the Land Act, and its 
 administration. That would while away the time. It was 
 a capital suggestion, and was readily agreed to. Every one 
 was happy and contented that Friday, at having found 
 something to do. On Saturday and Sunday the fire of 
 indignation burned in Mr. Gladstone's breast. Terror, too, 
 was in his heart, with gnawing and corroding suspicions. 
 What if some of the Lords had been reading Macaulay's 
 history, and had discovered the parallel between Lord 
 Tyrconnel and Mr. Gladstone himself? What if the real 
 but secret aim of the Land Act should be brought into 
 awkward relief by the Lords' Committee ? Mr. Gladstone 
 went to his place of worship ; but still these distressing 
 thoughts weighed heavily on his soul. The anthem rolled 
 its psalm of praise along the sky, and calmer thoughts took 
 the place of passion in Mr. Gladstone's breast. May we 
 not imagine that he said to himself: 'What if I should 
 ' turn the Lords' motion to account ? My aim is to 
 ' clip the wings of Parliament, and destroy Representative 
 ' Institutions. Parliament has two heads. I break up the 
 ' House of Commons, and thus I place my heel on one of 
 ' the heads ; but the other will still be there. Both heads 
 must be crushed.' 
 
 On Monday morning, Feb. 20, he sought out Lord 
 Granville, and the result appeared at the meetings of both 
 Houses. In the House of Lords, Lord Granville said, 
 with the suavest manner, the broad smile playing on his 
 mouth, as follows : " It will be only respectful to your 
 " lordships that I should state at once the course which the 
 " members of the Government in this House will pursue
 
 292 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " with regard to the committee which is to be appointed on 
 " the Irish Land Act and the condition of Ireland. We 
 " have consulted our colleagues, and we are of opinion that 
 "the objections stated by my noble friend, and which would 
 "have been reiterated by me if the noble marquis had 
 " attempted to answer the noble and learned lord on the 
 " woolsack, are of so grave a character that we should not 
 " be justified in taking any part in the constitution or in 
 " the proceedings of the committee." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone rose in the House of Commons. See ! 
 His posture erect ; his sallow complexion ; his overhanging 
 brows and piercing eyes ; and the corners of his mouth 
 drawn down, all proclaiming the imperious will, the 
 boisterous and impetuous character, and the biform form 
 and Parthian purpose of his soul. He said : " I beg to 
 " give notice that on Monday next I propose to move the 
 " following resolution : ' That a Parliamentary inquiry at 
 " ' the present time into the working of the Irish Land Act 
 " ' tends to defeat the operation of that Act, and must be 
 " ' injurious to the interests of good government in Ireland.'" 
 
 The agitation against the House of Lords had begun. 
 The sluice-gates of angry debate had been opened. Who 
 could tell when the torrents of talk would end, or whither 
 they would lead ? The cloture resolution had not been 
 passed ; and as for the supposed urgency of it, that was 
 little more thought of. Mr. Gladstone had determined to 
 gag the House of Commons, and to break the House of 
 Commons into fragments ; to menace the House of Lords, 
 to censure the House of Lords, and so to disgrace the 
 House of Lords before the country. Every one in the 
 House of Commons was aware that it is always highly 
 irregular to refer, in the House of Commons, to anything 
 that has taken place in the House of Lords, or to repeat 
 any word that has there been spoken. Yet Mr. Speaker 
 Brand ruled, when the question was put to him : " In 
 " answer to the question, all I can say at present is that the 
 " notice of motion of the right hon. gentleman is regular,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 293 
 
 "and that I can see no reason for objecting to it on 
 "technical grounds." 
 
 If Mr. Gladstone had risen and merely stated that what 
 had been resolved " in another place " (according to accus- 
 tomed phraseology) would have no effect on the future 
 policy of the Government, it would perhaps have been 
 regular. But to raise a debate on the proceedings of the 
 House of Lords was clearly not regular. Nor was it the 
 act of a statesman. He did all he could to raise an 
 agitation fraught with peril to the State, without in any 
 way offering a remedy for any of the evils which he might 
 have supposed, in a heated moment, would result from the 
 success of Lord Donoughmore's resolution. What could 
 be more unconstitutional than to ask one branch of the 
 Legislature to censure the other for doing what it had the 
 most undoubted right to do ? Why should he thus cast to 
 the winds the practice of centuries, and those orders of 
 both Houses which forbad one House to invade, in the 
 slightest degree, the independence of the other ? Did he 
 ihink that his menace would have the effect of coercing the 
 Lords into stultifying their House by reversing their vote ? 
 Did he hope thus also to degrade it in the eyes of the 
 nation ? Did he wish to raise a fierce agitation throughout 
 the country against the very existence of the House of 
 Lords ? Did he desire again to fan the flames of sedition 
 in Ireland, by bringing about a debate on the Irish Land 
 question and his " remedial measures" of 1881 ? Did he 
 desire to heat party animosities to a white heat, and inflame 
 party passions to a revolutionary rage? Did he desire 
 himself to cause such an obstruction in legislation, that the 
 people should arise and sweep away both Houses ? What 
 else were the " grave reasons having relation to the first 
 " necessities of society in Ireland," which he said did amply 
 justify his extraordinary step ? It was true that the 
 outrages had increased, in virtue of the action of his 
 " remedial measure." But then the Government had them- 
 selves encouraged the outrages, by publicly withdrawing
 
 294 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 protection from the " caretakers," that is, from those who 
 had been placed, by law, in charge of farms from which 
 tenants had been evicted. Agitation in Ireland ; agitation in 
 England ; agitation in Scotland ; obstruction in the House 
 of Commons ; and a conflict between the two Houses 
 of Parliament : such was the policy of Mr. Gladstone. 
 What was the end which, by these means, he hoped to 
 attain ? 
 
 No. XLIV. 
 
 IN consequence of the outcry which had been raised in the 
 press, Mr. Gladstone, on Feb. 20, 1882, moved his doture 
 resolution, in an amended form, which he announced as 
 follows : " The resolution now ends with the proviso, 
 " ' Provided that the question shall not be decided in the 
 " ' affirmative if a division be taken, unless it shall appear 
 " ' to have been supported by more than 200 members.' 
 "We do not propose any change in that part of the 
 "resolution. Then (as we propose) the following words 
 " will come : ' Or to have been opposed by 40 members 
 "'and supported by more than 100 members.'" That is 
 to say, 39 members may be overcome by 101 members, or 
 a majority of five to two ; while 40 members would require 
 20 1 members, or five to one, to vanquish them. Yet 300 
 members would be beaten by 301, and 200 members by 
 20 1 ! This, too, in face of his own declaration on the same 
 day (on the Bradlaugh question) that three times last year 
 he had been in a minority, and " tJie minority was right? 
 Mr. Gladstone, it will be perceived, took care of small 
 minorities. It was his desire that the Irish party, for 
 example, should not be overcome except by five to one. 
 But he did not care for the legitimate opposition of a large 
 minority, which should be extinguished by an excess of 
 one vote. If 201 vote to close a debate, and 200 wish to 
 continue, the one member will constitute " the evident 
 (< sense of the House."
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 295 
 
 Let us continue Mr. Gladstone's speech on the cloturc. 
 He traced the origin and causes of obstruction ; and 
 the pretended Liberal Minister laid the blame on the 
 Reform Bill of 1832: "The fundamental change which 
 " has occurred is owing to the passing of the first great 
 " Reform Bill. From that moment forward tJte position 
 "of the House was fundamentally altered. At once, 
 "from 1833, the pressure and calls upon the House were 
 "felt to be painful and almost intolerable. Considerable 
 " efforts were made to meet these calls ; but in spite of 
 " these efforts, they have grown more and more upon us, 
 " and I will instance the last twelve years, the last six 
 "years, and the last two years. During these years, from 
 " causes which it will be my duty to point out, these calls 
 " have grown until they have become, indeed, intolerable : 
 " intolerable to those who think that they are members of 
 " this House, not for the purpose merely of spending a 
 " certain number of hours more or less agreeably or dis- 
 " agreeably within its walls, but to regulate the changes of 
 " the Empire and to preserve the liberties of these countries. 
 " The growth of these labours is extraordinary. I will not 
 " attempt to give an exhaustive catalogue." 
 
 The quickwitted Irish members saw at once that Mr. 
 Gladstone was driving at the necessity of establishing a 
 separate Irish Parliament. He continued : " Has the 
 " House shunned or attempted to shun its duties ? Is it 
 " that the House feels its labours to be intolerable and 
 " finds it necessary to contract them ? Here is a most 
 " interesting fact I should like to bring to the notice of 
 " hon. members. At tfte time of the Reform Act there was 
 "a sudden and vast expansion of Parliamentary duty. 
 " That expansion was found intolerable, and Parliament 
 " did not continue it." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone then turned to the report of the number 
 of hours consumed in the House of Commons, the report 
 which was published in the Times on the morning of the 
 assembling of Parliament. He then added: "The plan
 
 296 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " we propose divides itself roughly into two parts, one of 
 " which relates to procedure, and the other relates to 
 " devolution or delegation. The latter is an attempt to econo- 
 " mise the labour of Parliament as it has been economised 
 "everywhere else. I do not know whether it will surprise 
 " the House, but I venture to hold strongly the opinion, 
 " that, although certain measures of procedure are vitally 
 " essential, yet that a device for the delegation of our labours 
 " is the more important. I consider that it will not be 
 " possible for the House to raise itself to the level where 
 "it can discharge its duties properly to the country, 
 " iinless it can devise some considerable kind of scheme of 
 " delegation" 
 
 Here then he advanced, again, his argument in favour 
 of Home Rule, or an independent Parliament in Dublin. 
 The argument was the same as that which had been 
 advanced by Mr. Butt, Mr. Parnell, and Mr. O'Connor 
 Power ; viz., the House of Commons is unable to discharge 
 all its duties, and therefore, purely Irish affairs must be 
 delegated to Dublin. This, Mr. Gladstone regarded as 
 more important than any reform of the rules of procedure. 
 The question of obstruction he then enlarged upon, yet he 
 never told the House that obstruction had been devised 
 and put in motion in order to bring about the autonomy 
 of Ireland, and to crumple up the Parliament of England : 
 "And here I come to consider what is commonly called 
 "obstruction. It is not a very easy matter to define 
 " obstruction ; and I will not attempt to define it for any 
 " one but myself. I will only give my description of it. 
 " To me it appears to be the disposition, either of the 
 " minority of the House or of individuals, to resist the 
 " prevailing will of the House otherwise than by argument. 
 " I use these words carefully, because I have contended 
 " myself, and / am still ready to contend, that what may 
 ''appear to the majority of the House to be the persistent and 
 " even reiterated pressure of argument, is not always obstruc- 
 " tive. . . . Generally, then, I think obstruction, as it has
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 297 
 
 " been spoken so much of in late years, may be considered 
 " the disposition of the minority or of individuals to resist the 
 "will of the House otherwise than by argument. I will just 
 " point to three stages in that unfortunate and ill-omened 
 "progression to which I have had occasion to advert. 
 " Undoubtedly it was the opinion either of the House or 
 " of the majority of the House that, in the Parliament of 
 " 1868, obstruction was sufficiently manifested. But the ob- 
 " struction which was then manifested, even in the opinion 
 " of the majority, did not present the gravest features which 
 "obstruction has since gradually developed. I take that 
 " Parliament as having exhibited obstruction in its first stages. 
 " Those who were the majority of the House thought it was 
 " tolerably pronounced. But they, nevertheless, advisedly 
 " abstained from proposing any method whatever, of a 
 " penal or restrictive kind, for the purpose of checking it, 
 " showing, I hope, a due respect for liberty of speech, even while 
 " they smarted, and while the House was most seriously 
 " impeded by proceedings which, though pursued no doubt 
 " honourably and conscientiously, it yet thought were mis- 
 "chievous. I come next to the Parliament of 1874. It 
 " was in that Parliament, I think it unquestionable, that 
 " there was a power developed, and that obstruction began 
 " to manifest, ambiguously perhaps, but yet to many 
 " intelligibly, certain features which had not before presented 
 " themselves. The two great subjects on which obstruction 
 "was experienced, in that Parliament, were the subjects of 
 " the South African Bill and Army flogging. But, in both 
 "of them, the great length of the debates which occurred 
 " was mixed with circumstances which make it not easy to 
 "form a perfectly accurate and impartial estimate of the 
 " obstructive forces that were put in action, because I believe 
 " I am right in regard to the South African Bill, and I 
 "know I am right in regard to the Army Discipline Bill, in 
 "saying that very important changes were introduced into 
 "these measures, and were the fruit and progress of long 
 " debates, and where that is so, it is not fair to drive home,
 
 298 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " without a great deal of hesitation, the charge of obstruc- 
 " tion. However, in the opinion of the House, some mea- 
 " sure was called for, and with great moderation the right 
 " hon. gentleman, who was then leader of the House, devised 
 " and proposed to the House a standing order which was 
 " accepted with very general approval. Now we come to 
 "the Parliament of 1880; and if the Parliament of 1874 
 " exhibited a development in comparison with the Parlia- 
 "ment of 1868, there is no doubt whatever that the 
 "Parliament of 1880 exhibits a most grave development 
 " in comparison with the Parliament of 1874. I mean that 
 "it became evident I do not question the patriotism or 
 " the uprightness of the views they entertain that a limited 
 "portion of the members of this House were disposed not only 
 " to show that the House was incapable of discharging all its 
 " legislative functions, but to make it incapable of doing so. 
 " Those who look back over the history of that remarkable 
 " session will not doubt the substantial truth of what I say. 
 " Last year we arrived at a climax in which you, sir, found 
 "yourself compelled to adopt, what you termed at the 
 " time an exceptional measure to take into your own hands 
 " the exercise of a power not committed to you either by the 
 " orders of the House or by the usages of the House. You 
 " did so in circumstances which I believe at least in the 
 " opinion of nine- tenths, I may say of nineteen-twentieths 
 "of the House earned for you an additional measure of 
 " their respect and gratitude." 
 
 Then adverting to his " Urgency " rules, he said : " The 
 " Government asked for measures of immediate and urgent 
 "necessity. They obtained the rules of urgency, which 
 " enabled them to press forward those measures in a manner 
 " which would otherwise have been impossible. How did 
 " they obtain those rules ? Why, sir, they obtained those 
 "rules owing to a most extraordinary error in tact [or 
 "was it intentional?] on the part of a certain number of 
 " members of this House which I ever saw committed, 
 " under which they contrived most kindly to place them-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 299 
 
 " selves in such a position that we were able to deal with 
 "them in a single division. Otherwise we might have 
 " been occupied with divisions throughout the night, and 
 " at the close of them would have been totally out of con- 
 " dition for dealing with the question of urgency." 
 
 Having said before, on this very evening (in the Brad- 
 laugh debate), that three times he was in a minority, and 
 that "the minority were right," he here stated the funda- 
 mental principle that " the will of the majority should 
 "prevail ;" not that justice and right should prevail ; not 
 that law should be observed ; but that the might of numbers 
 should cause all to bend and bow down to it. " There is 
 " but one sound principle in this House, and that is that 
 " the majority of the Hotise sJioiild prevail. The whole of 
 " our proceedings are founded upon it." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone concluded by moving the first resolution. 
 Sir Stafford Northcote followed with a speech of apparent 
 opposition ; but so weak, that it deadened all opposition, 
 and disheartened opponents. It was really of the greatest 
 assistance to Mr. Gladstone. Yet he must have seen, as 
 every one of any experience must have seen, that, in spite 
 of the fantastic tawdry tinsel in which the resolution was 
 enveloped, it would place the complete control of the 
 House and its debates in the hands of the Minister of 
 the day. To go about puling that no Government would 
 abuse those powers, was mere childish folly or idiotic 
 drivelling, which could deceive no one. That resolution 
 would make the Prime Minister a despot, and speedily 
 extinguish the House of Commons altogether. 
 
 It had been remarked that, although on every previous 
 occasion when a change in the rules and orders of the 
 House was contemplated, the Government consulted the 
 Opposition leaders, and came to some agreement with 
 them ; yet, on this occasion, no member of the House, 
 except the Speaker, had been taken into the confidence of 
 Mr. Gladstone ; that not the slightest regard had been 
 paid to the views of the Opposition ; and that the Govern-
 
 300 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 ment had assumed the most uncompromising attitude, 
 declaring that a penal dissolution of Parliament should 
 take place, unless the House should agree to the cloture in 
 the form that Mr. Gladstone proposed it. If that were 
 true, why did Sir Stafford not offer a real opposition ? And 
 yet he knew that the whole future history of the House of 
 Commons would assume a new character, and that the 
 very being of the House of Commons would be altered by 
 the adoption of that rule. The future House of Commons 
 would, as long as it should retain any life at all, be dis- 
 connected from the past ; and the old House of Commons 
 would come to an end with the passing of the rule ; 
 although the new kind of Assembly, bearing the old name, 
 might for a time struggle on with a rickety and mangey 
 existence. What shall we say when we consider this in 
 connection with the fact that Mr. Gladstone insulted the 
 House of Lords, by giving notice of a resolution to censure 
 that august body, because it determined, in the exercise of 
 its undoubted rights, to investigate the working of the 
 Land Act ? the Land Act which had so utterly belied 
 the reiterated statements on which its authors procured its 
 enactment, which had cut down rents in a way that its 
 authors said it would never cut them down ; and which 
 had increased outrage and sedition, although its authors 
 had been so positive that it would bring peace and con- 
 tent ? What shall we say, except that Mr. Gladstone was 
 effecting a Revolution, and abolishing the Legislature of 
 both Houses ? What shall we say, except that he was 
 striking at the very first principles of Representative 
 Government ? Why should he otherwise have provoked a 
 serious conflict between the two branches of the Legislature, 
 at the very time that he was seeking to establish the auto- 
 nomy, or rather separation of Ireland, and was sweeping 
 away the Protestant landlords of Ireland in order to 
 effect that purpose ? Why should he have created these 
 serious blocks on all useful legislation, by raising inter- 
 minable discussions on the cloture, and creating a conflict
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 301 
 
 between the two Houses, except it was to abolish them 
 both? 
 
 The Times of February 23 contained two letters of warn- 
 ing from supporters of Mr. Gladstone. The first was from 
 Mr. Peter Taylor, the ultra-Radical member for Leicester ; 
 the other was from Mr. Auberon Herbert, the brother of 
 Lord Carnarvon. The following is an extract from Mr. 
 Taylor's letter : " That the Radical party in the House of 
 " Commons should sit quietly by, and see the Government 
 " deliberately forge the weapon wliose chief force it is certain 
 " will in tJie future be used against the party of progress, is 
 " to my mind amazing. It becomes, however, less annoy- 
 " ing, though not less painful, when one becomes aware 
 " that not a few of the aforesaid Radicals are acting under 
 " the strongest pressure from without, and in the teeth of 
 " their own convictions. A well-known Radical member 
 " replied to my question as to whether it was possible he 
 " was going to support the cloture by saying, ' / detest it, 
 " ' but I am no more free to vote against it than I should be to 
 " ' refuse my purse on a dark night to a man who held a re- 
 " ' volver at my head.' . . . It seems we are threatened 
 " with a dissolution if the Government should be defeated 
 " on the cloture, and it is supposed that a new election 
 " would see the Tories once more in power. So be it, say 
 " I for one, rather than diminish the usefulness and de- 
 " generate the methods of the British House of Commons." 
 
 Now let us hear the Hon. Auberon Herbert on the 
 working of the Caucus : " As soon as the signs of any 
 " opposition are perceived, a circular, such as that which 
 "appeared in the Times on Monday, the 1 3th, is drafted 
 " and sent off to the local associations to furnish a text on 
 " which resolutions are to be framed, and the feelings of 
 " the country sent up in a convenient and compact form to 
 " London. It is difficult to read that circular, and to doubt 
 " as regards the inspiration to which we owe it. The very 
 " words used betray the concealed prompter. It is not the 
 " voice of one speaking from outside, but from inside the
 
 302 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Government, who begs ' for support of rules which, after 
 " ' anxious and mature deliberation, Her Majesty's Ministers 
 " 'have submitted to Parliament as absolutely necessary for 
 " ' the purpose in view,' and again, ' rules . . . which 
 '"the Government declare to be absolutely necessary for 
 "'the conduct of public business.' We are all, of course, 
 " delighted to hear that the Government have expended 
 " anxious and mature deliberation ; but who, except some 
 " one from inside, is competent to give us this information ? 
 " . . . So much about the authorship seems clear, and 
 " whether Mr. Chamberlain, or the Federated Secretary, or 
 " the Federated Chairman, or some other gentleman from 
 " Birmingham, strung the sentences together matters but 
 " little. The point that has importance is that this docu- 
 " ment, which begs for uninquiring confidence in the wisdom 
 " of Ministers, and is composed much in the spirit of an 
 " Encyclical, is the product not of any spontaneous feeling 
 " in the country, not even of so much spontaneous feeling 
 " as might be generated if you brought a roomful of 
 " federated committee-men together from different parts of 
 " the country, put them round a table, and allowed them, 
 " like the good people at a conjurer's show, to imagine that 
 " they chose the particular card out of the cards presented 
 " to them, but that its true birthplace has been either in a 
 " Minister's study or the Whip's room at Westminster. 
 " Such, then, is the working of the Caucus machinery. 
 " Few questions are now really placed before the people 
 " in the constituencies for their honest consideration and 
 " true judgment The political markets are mostly rigged, 
 " and the results are known and arranged beforehand by 
 " the managers. The Ministers claim that the voice of the 
 " country approves and urges them forward ; in reality, it is 
 " only a skilful contrivance by which their own voices come 
 " back to them gloriously magnified. Mr. Chamberlain 
 " stands at one end of the electioneering telephone, and 
 " the words which he whispers to it travel on, and, by an 
 " improved method to which ordinary science has not yet
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 303 
 
 " attained, are repeated by every wire diverging to the 
 " provinces ; while, just as Professor Hughes's admirable 
 " invention of the microphone turns the tread of a fly into 
 " the distant trampling of the elephant, so Mr. Chamberlain's 
 " sentences come back to Westminster deepened in tone by 
 " the imitated thunder of an aroused people. ... Of 
 " course, behind this political machinery lies a far graver 
 " evil. It would be wilful blindness not to recognise it. 
 " Unless there were in our constituencies great suppression 
 "of individual convictions and reckless party feeling, no 
 " mere management or manipulation could poison our 
 " political life." 
 
 Thus Mr. Auberon Herbert exposed Mr. Gladstone's 
 system. Mr. Gladstone, while carrying out the Jesuit 
 policy of the reign of James II., insisted on finding in his 
 followers the unquestioning and unreasoning obedience 
 which is required of all Jesuits and their adherents. Mr. 
 D'Israeli, it will be remembered, required the same sub- 
 mission on the part of all his followers, and proceeded to 
 crush any one who refused to yield it or showed any 
 sign of independence. The Tory country gentlemen, who 
 formed what Mr. Mill insolently called " the stupid party," 
 were too stiff-backed to yield up their own convictions 
 without question, and too honest to deny their convictions 
 by public speech or vote. Mr. Gladstone found the Liberal 
 party more submissive or less honest, and bade fair to 
 accomplish that in which Lord Beaconsfield had failed. 
 
 Another Liberal member wrote a letter "On the Position 
 " of Liberal Members" which appeared in the Times of 
 Feb. 24. That gentleman called " attention to the dis- 
 " astrous effect the Caucus machinery has produced upon 
 "the relations which subsist between the leaders of the 
 " Liberal party and its rank and file in this House. Up to 
 " a comparatively recent period it was the practice from 
 " time to time to call meetings of the party, when the form, 
 " at least, of consultation as to the common policy was gone 
 " through ; but what was, perhaps, more important, the
 
 304 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " whips made it their constant business to ascertain from 
 " individual members their personal views and the feeling 
 " of their constituencies upon questions of importance, as a 
 " guide to the Cabinet in arriving at conclusions, and as a 
 " means of ascertaining and of removing differences. This 
 " was the practice of Sir William Hayter. ... Of late 
 " years it is notorious that the views of private members 
 " of the House, however experienced or influential, as repre- 
 " senting large constituencies, are rarely if ever asked ; and 
 " if advice is proffered, it is received with more or less of 
 "indifference or contempt. Since 1880 to go no farther 
 " back the party have not been consulted, either in- 
 " dividually or collectively, but an ukase is issued, and im- 
 " plicit obedience to it demanded. The fact is that the heads 
 " of the party, relying on the coercive action of the Caucus 
 <( to insure obedience, regard the individual member as of 
 " less importance than the secretary of the local organiza- 
 " tion, who virtually directs his vote. It is clear to me tJiat 
 " the result to be expected from this system is already apparent, 
 " and ^v^ll shortly culminate in ttie disintegration of tJie great 
 " majority placed at Mr. Gladstone's disposal in \ 880. Mem- 
 " bers with any self-respect cannot but resent the tone of 
 " dictation assumed by their leaders ; and though circum- 
 " stances may compel obedience to the mandate of the 
 " Caucus, a vote so obtained leaves behind a sense of 
 " humiliation rarely forgiven and never forgotten." 
 
 On Feb. 27, Mr. Gladstone moved to postpone the 
 orders of the day until after his motion of censure on 
 the House of Lords. Sir Stafford Northcote's speech, in 
 so-called opposition to Mr. Gladstone, evinced a studied 
 weakness, mixed with milksop flattery. According to the 
 Times, it was "faint-hearted in tone and inconclusive 
 " in substance." The motion of censure was therefore 
 speedily arrived at, and moved by Mr. Gladstone. Mr. 
 Gibson made an able speech in reply, in which he charged 
 Mr. Gladstone with having created and provoked the crisis 
 of which he had complained ; because that he had kept
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 305 
 
 back, and not permitted to be urged in the House of 
 Lords, at the outset, the reasons, which had just been 
 hinted at by Mr. Gladstone, against the proposed inquiry 
 into the principles which had guided the Commissioners 
 and Sub-commissioners in their judgments under the Land 
 Act. Mr. Gibson was right. To gag the House of Com- 
 mons, and handcuff the House of Lords, was evidently 
 Mr. Gladstone's aim as a means to his ulterior end. He 
 desired the crisis of which he had taken advantage. Sir 
 Walter Barttelot very aptly retorted on Mr. Gladstone by 
 saying in effect : " If you urge that an inquiry by the 
 " House of Lords, into the working of the Land Act, will 
 " be fraught with the gravest dangers for Ireland, will not 
 " a long debate upon it in the House of Commons be far 
 " more injurious, than an inquiry conducted in a quiet room 
 " upstairs ? Yet you, Mr. Gladstone, have wantonly raised 
 " such a debate in the Commons." Mr. McCarthy, indeed, 
 the leader of the Irish party during Mr. Parnell's absence, 
 openly announced their intention of taking part in the 
 debate and voting against the Government, with the object 
 of discrediting the Land Act ; while Mr. O'Donnell com- 
 plained of Sir Stafford Northcote for moving the Previous 
 Question, with the object of excluding those various amend- 
 ments, of which notice had been given, which would have 
 reopened the whole agrarian question. Yes ! that was 
 doubtless precisely the reason which had induced Sir 
 Stafford to interpose so suddenly with the Previous 
 Question. He perhaps desired to exclude those amend- 
 ments ; he sought to stifle debate. The milksop speech 
 was obviously, therefore, the result of a complicity with 
 Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 The St. James's Gazette contained, on March i, an 
 article evincing such profundity and perspicacity with, 
 perhaps, more knowledge of the recondite meaning of 
 events, and the secret policy of Mr. Gladstone, than quite 
 appeared on the surface that I do not hesitate to quote 
 lengthy extracts from it. 
 
 X
 
 3o6 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "Our institutions are undergoing a dangerous depra- 
 " vation ; and if we hand them on without having arrested 
 " it, we may be preparing the way to their dissolution by 
 "means we cannot now foresee with precision. For, just let 
 " us calmly run over in our minds what is being done, and 
 " what has been done. We are in presence of an attempt 
 " to silence both Houses of Parliament. The House of 
 "Commons is to pass a self-denying ordinance, under 
 " which it is to discuss the proposals of the Minister no 
 " longer than the majority pleases. But the majority is 
 " the Minister. The identity has for two years past been 
 " almost complete, and the suggestions, (the cloture with 
 " the action of the Caucus, and the motion of censure on 
 " the House of Lords) of which we have spoken, mean 
 "that it is to be perfected. As to the House of Lords, 
 " there is an open endeavour to terrorize it. It may be 
 " remembered that last year the organs of the majority of 
 " the House of Commons, now itself about to be enslaved, 
 " boldly denied the right of the House of Lords to share 
 " in legislation. They boasted that, by their clamour, they 
 "had prevented the House of Lords from engrafting, upon 
 "the Land Bill, amendments which in the light of existing 
 " circumstances we can see to have been eminently wise 
 " and urgently necessary. The present plea of the Conserva- 
 " tive leaders of the Upper House is that they made those 
 " concessions because they were deceived. They say that, 
 " so far as they can make out from the materials before 
 " them, one Minister was allowed to make statements ivhich 
 " another Minister sitting by his side knew to be false in 
 "fact. Imprudently perhaps, but most naturally, they wish 
 " to inquire how all this came about ; but the reply of 
 " the Minister is an order to his captains of thousands to 
 " order the majority of the House of Commons to support 
 " him in censuring them, and they are sought to be made 
 " responsible for a state of public affairs which threatens 
 " to be not anarchy but chaos. 
 
 " We have therefore actually before our eyes a memor-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 307 
 
 " able scene in the great drama of English history. In our 
 "time tJte pretext of Revolution in one part of the empire is 
 " being used to prevent the Estates of the Realm, not from 
 " disputing, but from debating, the measures of the Govern- 
 "ment. The Prime Minister, clothed with the authority of 
 "the Crown, is inflicting, on the Houses of Parliament, an 
 " equally effectual but meaner humiliation than if he had 
 " burned the woolsack and sent the mace to Christie and 
 " Manson's. He refuses to one House speech ; to the other, 
 " what is less than speech, the right of inquiry. But even 
 " more striking than the facts are the imperceptible changes 
 " which have led to them, and the recency of origin. It is 
 " to be carefully observed that the Minister, in his demands 
 " upon the House of Commons, is not asking for greater 
 " liberty of executive action. One serious complaint 
 " against him is, that the very crisis, which he makes the 
 "excuse for seeking to obtain such tremendous privileges, 
 "was in reality broiight about by slackness in exercising 
 " executive powers already in existence, and delay in asking 
 " for additional powers which he thought indispensable. 
 " The suggestion, that he shall be allowed to close the 
 " mouth of the House of Commons, is put upon the 
 " ground that he is desirous not of acting but of legis- 
 " lating. He wishes for less dilatory talk about his own 
 "legislative proposals. Thus the extremely modern 
 " opinion that it is part of the business of the Executive 
 " Government to submit to Parliament not only measures 
 " necessary for the conduct of public affairs, but measures 
 " intended to introduce sweeping social changes, has 
 " produced in our time the extraordinary doctrine that the 
 " Government, and not Parliament, is the real Legislature ; 
 " and that the duty of the majority of the representatives 
 " is not to sift the proposals of the Minister, but to see 
 " that they are carried through. . . . There is, in fact, no 
 " sort of doubt tJiat Mr. Gladstone's New Procedure for tlie 
 " House of Commons, and his censure of the House of Lords, 
 "are integral portions of one and the same policy. It
 
 3o3 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " would be an idle speculation to inquire how the mind 
 "of the Minister has been brought to these conclusions, or 
 " whether he distinctly realizes all they imply. What is 
 "important is t he fact that THEY MENACE THE ENTIRE 
 " BRITISH CONSTITUTION. It cannot be mere accident 
 " that the Conservative Opposition was one day told not 
 " to be so frightened at the cloture, because it had the 
 " House of Lords to insure discussion, and that a few days 
 " afterwards the cloture resolution was displaced by the 
 " notice of censure on the House of Lords. The whole of 
 " tJie new policy hangs together; and in its perfect consistency 
 " it means a danger of tJie utmost gravity to the organs of 
 u freedom in the country in whicJi modern liberty was born'' 
 Quite true ! For the few who followed events to their 
 causes, and who connected the events of one day with 
 those of another day, in order to arrive at the principle of 
 them, there was no doubt that the cloture resolution, and 
 the motion of censure on the House of Lords, were " in- 
 " tegral portions of one and the same policy." Was there 
 any doubt that all Mr. Gladstone's policy hung together in 
 " perfect consistency," and that the aim of the Liberal 
 Ministry and Liberal Cabinet was the destruction of " the 
 " organs of freedom in the country in which modern 
 " liberty was born " ? 
 
 No. XLV. 
 
 THE true aim of Mr. Gladstone was made more apparent 
 by the events of the next day. The " Order of Reference " 
 of the House of Lords, passed on Lord Donoughmore's 
 motion, was : " To inquire into the working of recent legis- 
 "lation relating to land in Ireland, and its effect on the 
 " condition of the country." 
 
 On March 2, it was announced that Earl Cairns, the 
 Chairman of the Committee, had written to Mr. Forster, 
 the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland,
 
 CLUE TO THZ.1-R SOLUTION. 309 
 
 asking him to appear before the Committee and give 
 evidence. He stated that the Committee had resolved : 
 " that they do not consider it to be within the scope of the 
 " reference made to them by the House, to inquire into the 
 " correctness of any decision at which the Commissioners 
 "or the Sub-commissioners, in the exercise of their judi- 
 " cial functions, may have arrived." 
 
 It must be remembered that Mr. Gladstone, in the 
 House of Commons, reiterated (as he said) the offer pre- 
 viously made by Lord Granville in the House of Lords, 
 and called the House of Commons to bear witness to his 
 " official and responsible declaration," addressed in " ex- 
 plicit and determined" language to the House of Lords. 
 That declaration was in the following terms : " Contrive 
 " in any way you like formally to exclude from the inquiry 
 " the judicial administration of the Act, and to every other 
 "form of the inquiry we will waive the serious objections 
 " we entertain." 
 
 Compare this declaration, this offer of compromise, with 
 the resolution of the Committee of the House of Lords, 
 which was conveyed to Mr. Forster by Lord Cairns. 
 Wherein did it differ ? Perhaps it was not " formally " 
 resolved ! Otherwise the requirement of the terms of 
 surrender cover exactly the same ground. On the omission 
 of the word " formally," perhaps, Mr. Gladstone rested his 
 case. At all events, he sent word that it was not satisfac- 
 tory, and that Mr. Forster would not be allowed to appear 
 to give evidence before the Lords. Lord Cairns had 
 practically surrendered the position taken up by the House 
 of Peers ; he had virtually conceded that the Land Act 
 must not be inquired into or interfered with ; and yet Mr. 
 Gladstone persisted in his vote of censure on the House of 
 Lords. He must have had some other aim in view than 
 that which he stated to the House. It was his recondite 
 policy which had not been fulfilled ; his occult aim that had 
 not been attained. 
 
 He clearly intended, at all events, to inflict a humiliation
 
 310 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 on the House of Lords, in the face of the country. It was 
 he, in the first instance, who had cut off the direct path of 
 retreat from the Lords, by giving public notice of his vote 
 of censure. The Peers could then no longer acquiesce in 
 the pretensions it involved. They could not admit that the 
 majority in the House of Commons had a right to control 
 and censure the House of Lords, as if it were not an inde- 
 pendent authority, but were merely an assembly in subor- 
 dination to a supreme House of Commons. 
 
 Let us, for a moment, revert to the original position of 
 affairs. Every one had been informed that the Land Act 
 was being administered, not as the Act was represented to 
 be when it was passed, but as something very different. 
 The Sub-commissioners, and even the Commissioners, were 
 currently reported to be carrying out a secret principle for 
 dispossessing the landlords, and not acting as judges in de- 
 termining fair rents and dealing justly to both landlords and 
 tenants. The Act was said not to be administered at all, in 
 fact, but to be used merely as a cover for a mock-judicial 
 extortion and robbery. Was it not natural that the Peers 
 should desire to find out whether the current belief was 
 true ? Was it not their duty, as the highest Law Court in 
 the realm, to ascertain whether a gross injustice was not 
 being extensively practised under pretence of administering 
 the law ? 
 
 From the point of view of the Government, the same 
 anxiety should have been manifested. The assurances 
 they had given as to the meaning and operation of the 
 Act, their repeated asseverations, by which they had pro- 
 cured the passing of the Act, had been most notoriously 
 falsified. Instead of the reductions in rent having been 
 very small, they were 25, 30, and even 50 per cent. In- 
 stead of very few small landlords being all that would 
 be touched by the Act, it was hitting every one very hard. 
 Instead of the Act having been dispassionately and justly 
 administered, the Commissioners admitted that they had 
 been regardless of the Act, deciding according to certain
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 311 
 
 " general principles which had been settled by the three 
 " Chief Commissioners at a meeting in Dublin, before a 
 "sod had been turned." Would it not have been natural 
 that the Government should have wished to ascertain the 
 real facts, and thus either have proved that their assurances 
 had not been falsified, or else to punish the Commissioners 
 for being traitors to the law, and true to the Land League. 
 Was it not the duty of the Government to cause such 
 an inquiry to be made ? Yet they refused it, and said that 
 any inquiry, even if privately conducted in a room up- 
 stairs, must inevitably produce the most dreadful con- 
 sequences in Ireland. They, however, themselves invited 
 a debate on the Land Act, in the House of Commons, 
 when any persons, heated by party feeling and smarting 
 under recent losses, could make the most reckless asser- 
 tions against the Act, without the danger of being cross- 
 examined : and when their words would be published 
 through the length and breadth of the land, instead of 
 being buried in the pages of a voluminous Blue-book. 
 Was it not then obvious that Mr. Gladstone's aim was, 
 not to restrict the inquiry, but to degrade, discredit, and 
 damn the House of Lords ? The House of Lords must 
 openly and avowedly submit to him and to the dictation 
 of a majority in the House of Commons. 
 
 If a calm and quasi-judicial inquiry by Peers would 
 cause a revolution in Ireland, what would a furious 
 partisan debate in the Commons do ? Listen to Mr. 
 Sexton, on March 2, inveighing, in fiery eloquence, against 
 the Land Act, and proving it such a failure that an 
 inquiry was absolutely necessary ! and he a Romanist 
 Irish member ! Listen to the criticisms of the Opposition ! 
 Hearken to the denunciations of the Home Rulers ! Yet 
 not a member of the Government interposed to offer a 
 reply to the criticisms and denunciations ! On all sides, 
 there was unanimity in favour of an inquiry into the Land 
 Act, and in pouring out condemnations of the Land Act 
 as a failure. The Government might even have closed the
 
 3 i2 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 debate on that Thursday ; for all parties were tired of it. 
 They did not desire to do so. They sought to prolong the 
 inquiry, and multiply the criticisms. 
 
 Lest a suspicion of partiality should arise, let us look at 
 the judgment pronounced by an organ hitherto favourable 
 to the Government, the Times of March 3 : " The attitude 
 " of the Government was one of extreme reserve. No 
 "speeches were made by the rank and file of the Min- 
 " isterialists. Nor did any one rise on the Treasury 
 "bench, until the Solicitor-General for Ireland interposed 
 " in the debate towards its close. The discussion was 
 " carried on by the Conservatives and the Irish members, 
 "who adduced a variety of arguments and testimonies in 
 " support of the contention that an inquiry was practicable 
 " and expedient. Yet it was understood that the Govern- 
 " ment had used no pressure to bring the debate to a close ; 
 "though if that had been done it was evident that neither 
 " the leaders of the Opposition nor the Land League party 
 "would have made resistance. The Whips had arranged, 
 "according to prevailing rumour, that the debate should be 
 "again adjourned ; and in the meantime it was continued, 
 "as we have stated, almost exclusively by various critics of 
 "the Land Act. Nothing was said on the Ministerial side, 
 " upon the aspect of the matter which was most interest- 
 ing to members of the House of Commons. It was 
 " not explained why the vote of censure is to be pressed, 
 " after the communication made by Lord Cairns to Mr. 
 " Forster, and why it is deemed necessary to protract a 
 " discussion, which involves waste of valuable time and 
 "stirs up party spirit, when it is clear that the Oppo- 
 "sition are not bent on making a determined stand 
 "against the master of many legions. . . . It is cer- 
 " tainly remarkable that no representative of the Cabinet 
 " was put forward last night to state how this declaration 
 "of the Lords' Committee falls short of the guarantee 
 " which the Prime Minister on Monday pronounced 
 " indispensable."
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 313 
 
 For another week this malefic debate was still pending. 
 Even Mr. Gladstone's friends and admirers began to 
 murmur that " the interpolation of such a debate, amidst 
 " the crowded business of a session, was wholly unnecessary 
 " and vexatious." Night after night had, in their eyes, 
 been thrown away ; and the debate was no nearer an end 
 than before. Not a member of the Government, except 
 the Solicitor-General for Ireland, had spoken since Mr. 
 Gladstone's introductory speech ; and no one had attempted 
 to touch upon or explain the " first necessities " of govern- 
 ment, and the " primary interests of society in Ireland," 
 which required the House of Commons to pass a censure 
 on the House of Lords for venturing to inquire into the 
 Land Act. No one attempted to explain why the " urgent " 
 business of the Legislature should be blocked, for days, 
 by the very man who had proposed to muzzle the House 
 of Commons, in order to get that business done. No one 
 had attempted the task, because they would have had to 
 explain how muzzling the House of Commons and gagging 
 the House of Lords were parts of one policy, for getting 
 rid of that Representative form of Government, so hated by 
 the Jesuit party. 
 
 At last, on March 9, the debate in degradation of the 
 House of Lords had been kept long enough before the 
 country ; the division took place ; and the vote of censure 
 was passed. All the obloquy that was possible had been 
 heaped on the House of Lords. 
 
 On Saturday, the nth of March, the following was the 
 judgment formed by the editor of the Times, whose testi- 
 mony may be regarded as impartial and conclusive : "The 
 " debate on procedure in the House of Commons has been 
 " once again postponed in the name of more urgent busi- 
 " ness. . . . On Monday week, just one month will have 
 " passed since the new rules were introduced for discussion ; 
 "just six weeks will have passed since Parliament met. 
 " The intervals have been busy, but they have been almost 
 " absolutely barren of result. Little or nothing has been
 
 314 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " done, because little or nothing has been attempted. . . . The 
 " performance has fallen even more than usually short of 
 " the promise. Obstruction, in the ordinary sense of the 
 " word, has not been to blame here. The work of obstruc- 
 tion has none the less been effectually done. Public 
 " business has been almost at a standstill, while the time 
 " of the House has been taken up, its working power frit- 
 "tered away, and its energies exhausted in a species of 
 " strenuous idleness. . . . The House has done nothing; 
 " but it has done as miLch as the Government has hitJierto 
 "asked it to do. . . . The new Rules of Procedure, 
 " if they are passed at all, will be passed only at the 
 "sacrifice of a working year. . . . The Rules, in fact, 
 " cover so wide a field, and in some respects are so revo- 
 " lutionary in their aim, that the House may well pause, 
 " and may deem a session not altogether wasted in getting 
 " rid of them or in rendering them harmless. . . . The 
 "rule for closing debate by a bare majority, if carried 
 " at all, will be carried by main force. The general sense 
 " of the House is known not to be favourable to it. The 
 "proposals are distinctly those of the Government. ... It 
 " is only under pressure that they will be approved. Mem- 
 "bers will vote for them, not because they like them, but 
 " because they think it a less evil to accept than to reject 
 " them and to face the prospect of a dissolution." Verily, 
 Mr. Gladstone's difficulties were thickening ! The Times 
 leader proceeded thus : " It is fair cause of complaint, 
 " not only that the Liberal party has not been taken into 
 " the counsels of the Government, but that neither has the 
 " Conservative party. The subject is one in which both 
 " parties are concerned, and in which both have an almost 
 " equal right of speech. The way in which the Government 
 " has set about its self-imposed task raises the suspicion that 
 " the NEW RULES HAVE MORE MEANING THAN is ACKNOW- 
 " LEDGED FOR THEM, and that they are intended to serve as 
 " the prelude for some UNDECLARED DRASTIC MEASURES 
 "ofzvhich no hint has been given in the Queen's Speech,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 315 
 
 " and which will be as much of a surprise as the new Rules 
 " themselves have been." 
 
 The leading journal, looking to the far horizon, saw in the 
 new Rules a meaning which no one had acknowledged. 
 The Times could discern, in the dim impenetrability of 
 Mr. Gladstone's mind, some drastic measures which he had 
 not declared ! Then there was danger in pressing the 
 new Rules ? Yes ! There was no doubt that Mr. Glad- 
 stone's difficulties were thickening. On Monday, March 
 13, the Daily News the Ministerial journal showed, by 
 its leading article, that the people of England were 
 getting their eyes opened. It declared that : " Ministers 
 "must be prepared to show that they have left nothing 
 " undone to promote economy of time and labour, and to 
 " bring before the House of Commons the measures pro- 
 " mised in the Speech from the Throne." They had sur- 
 rendered a fortnight, or rather the four Government nights 
 of a fortnight, to " stale recriminations " and " criticism 
 " which was necessarily futile, if only because it was alto- 
 " gether premature ; " and, as nothing could possibly have 
 been gained by such an injurious waste of time, "a clear 
 "and decided statement, from the Prime Minister, of the 
 "view taken by the Government, on the conduct of the 
 " Lords, would have done all the good and none of the 
 " harm which had resulted from a prolonged, and, in the 
 "circumstances, a mischievous controversy." When Mr. 
 Gladstone's own journals turned against him, his policy 
 must have indeed been surrounded with difficulties, and 
 opposed by obstacles. The rats do not leave a rotten ship 
 until it is sinking ! But what was the cause of the dangers 
 and difficulties ? Merely this : a little light had been 
 thrown on Mr. Gladstone's secret aim. 
 
 And yet the very next day, March 14, we learned 
 that the address, very numerously signed by Liberal 
 members of Parliament, praying for the adoption of a 
 two-thirds majority for the imposition of the cldture, had 
 elicited from Mr. Gladstone the reply that " the Govern-
 
 316 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " ment were unable to comply with the request, and that 
 " they would press on their first resolution until the judg- 
 " ment of the House had been obtained upon it." 
 
 No. XLVI. 
 
 IN the evening of March 14, Mr. Childers, on being asked 
 to state an hour after which he would not bring on the 
 Army Estimates, said that it " was absolutely necessary," 
 in order to comply with the law, that " the first two votes 
 " for the Army and Navy should be reported not later than 
 " Monday next. If they were not so reported, it was difn- 
 " cult to see how illegality could possibly be avoided. At 
 " any rate, they could not be responsible if they were not 
 "reported at that time. There were only two days in 
 " this week in which the Government could possibly take 
 "these votes namely, on Monday and Thursday." Mr. 
 O'Donnell very pertinently or impertinently asked 
 whether the Government were aware of the urgent and im- 
 perative haste required in the Army and Navy Estimates 
 "when they invited the House to enter upon a fortnight's 
 "abstract discussion"? Some members expressed their 
 willingness to postpone their motions, which were down 
 for that evening, on going into Supply, if Mr. Gladstone 
 would give them an opportunity of moving them the next 
 week ; but they received the curt and discourteous answer 
 contained in these few words : " It is not in my power to 
 "do so." Others desired an assurance that an early oppor- 
 tunity would be given for the discussion of the Army and 
 Navy Estimates, reminding the Government that they had 
 been beguiled, the previous year, into giving way to the 
 Government, and that Mr. Gladstone had put off the fulfil- 
 ment of his promise until August. Mr. Gladstone replied : 
 " I quite agree that it is not creditable that such important 
 "questions should be discussed in August, but I would also 
 " point out that the entire arrangement for the discharge of 
 "public business is as far as possible from being creditable."
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 317 
 
 The address to the Crown had been voted a month pre- 
 viously, and none of the subjects promised in the Queen's 
 Speech, except the first brush with the cloture resolution, 
 had been entered upon. The rest of the time had been 
 wasted in useless debates, initiated by Mr. Gladstone him- 
 self. He then blamed the House for that waste of time 
 which had made the immediate voting of the Army and 
 Navy Estimates so urgent, and he hinted that the cloture 
 and his other drastic resolutions, must first be passed, 
 before he would enter upon any business. "The pre- 
 liminary conversation," said the Times, "on the arrange- 
 " ment of public business, took a sharp and almost angry 
 "tone, which did not stimulate the good nature, or even 
 " the public spirit, of the members appealed to." 
 
 Mr. J. Cowen asked the Prime Minister if he would post- 
 pone the debate on the resolution until after Easter, so as 
 to allow the principal votes to be taken in the meantime. 
 Mr. Gladstone replied : " I cannot/ sir, entertain the pro- 
 " posal ; " and further, Mr. Gladstone said that : " It was 
 "then March, and what the Government believed was, that 
 "by taking the judgment of the House upon matters of 
 "procedure, and by endeavouring to arrange a good system 
 " both of procedure, strictly so-called, and of a division of 
 " labour in the way of delegation of labour, they were 
 " really offering to the House the best securities they could 
 " for the discussion of the Estimates in proper time. . . 
 " It was with a view to the proper disposal of Supply that 
 "he was about to submit his resolutions to the House. 
 "One of the principal objects they had in view whatever 
 "might be the form which those resolutions might ulti- 
 " mately assume was the effective and early discussion of 
 " matters in Supply." 
 
 Sir Stafford Northcote urged that it was an admitted 
 principle of the Constitution that the statement of griev- 
 ances should precede the granting of Supply, and that 
 members had " a perfect right " to bring their grievances 
 forward.
 
 3i8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Mr. O'Donnell said : " The prospect before them was 
 " that they were not to have an opportunity of discussing 
 " important questions at all, until the cloture was passed ; 
 "and then the cloture would prevent them from discussing 
 " important questions. . . . They were now asked, by 
 " the Premier, to hurry forward in a by no means decent 
 "fashion the discussion of the Estimates, on the ground of 
 " shortness of time, simply because the Premier had wasted 
 " the time of the House, since the commencement of the 
 "session, upon grounds now acknowledged to be utterly 
 " fallacious." 
 
 When all the legitimate discussion on the subject had 
 been exhausted, the great spectre of Irish obstruction was 
 again brought on the stage, in order to create that urgency 
 which Mr. Gladstone had professed his desire to avoid, and 
 to discipline the House into a ready acquiescence with Mr. 
 Gladstone in his drastic proposals for the procedure of the 
 House. Mr. Redmond rose to call attention to the treat- 
 ment of the Irish "suspects." The object of this inter- 
 vention was made apparent by an attempt to count out 
 the House. On the failure of that attempt to procure 
 delay with indolence, the delay was sought to be attained 
 by means of activity. The Irish members all ran in full 
 cry after Mr. Forster, after the wrongs of the Basutos, after 
 calumnious charges against the Cape Government It was 
 not until one o'clock in the morning that Mr. Childers 
 could commence his statement. The effect, as evinced in 
 the lobbies at night, was satisfactory to Mr. Gladstone. 
 He had achieved a partial, although perhaps a temporary, 
 success. The cloture resolution was said on all hands to 
 be "drastic," to be "stringent," to be "peremptory," and 
 " Oh ! how necessary if we are to avoid for the future such 
 " lamentable occurrences as those of this night." 
 
 Yet the delay had not occurred from one protracted 
 debate ; and the cloture would, therefore, have been un- 
 available. It had arisen from the ventilation of numerous 
 questions ; or rather, from the passions of members whom
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 319 
 
 Mr. Gladstone had excited. "Yet," it was said, "Mr. 
 " Gladstone's twelfth resolution, which will preclude mem- 
 "bers from making known the grievances of their con- 
 "stituents, before a Supply is granted to Her Majesty, 
 " would be effective ! " Yes, truly ; an overturn of the 
 Constitution would certainly prevent the advantages of our 
 Constitution from being enjoyed ! and Mr. Gladstone is 
 the man to do that ! 
 
 The next day, Mr. Anderson asked Mr. Gladstone 
 whether he would postpone the cloture resolution until 
 after Rules 2 and 12 of the Resolutions (relating to urgency 
 of Supply), so as to enable the House to proceed speedily 
 with that business. Mr. Gladstone answered emphatically 
 that the Government had considered that matter carefully 
 before they had given notice of their Resolutions, and that 
 they would adhere to the order which they had decided on. 
 Mr. Healy asked whether Mr. Gladstone intended to make 
 use of the cloture resolution as soon as it should be passed, 
 in order to assist him in passing the others, and Mr. Glad- 
 stone acknowledged that such was his intention. 
 
 The House doubtless bore in mind the occasion last 
 year, when Mr. Gladstone asked that " Urgency in Supply" 
 should be granted, on the ground that it would otherwise 
 be " absolutely impossible " to get the votes passed in time 
 to enable the Government to comply with the requirements 
 of the law ; and when Sir Stafford showed that it was 
 quite possible to do that which Mr. Gladstone had declared 
 to be " absolutely impossible " ; and when the event had 
 given the lie to Mr. Gladstone's assertion. Hence, no 
 doubt, the irritation of the House on the present occasion. 
 They feared that it was not the fulfilment of the law 
 which Mr. Gladstone desired, but the subversion of the 
 Constitution ; not the saving of time, but the loss of free- 
 dom of speech in the House of Commons. The plea 
 urged by Mr. Childers, and reiterated by Mr. Gladstone 
 in 1 882, was identical with the plea which he had urged 
 and reiterated in 1881 ; and it was as incorrect
 
 320 . RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 The pressure put upon Mr. Gladstone, to induce him 
 to reconsider his decision regarding the cldture, and to 
 assent to a majority of two-thirds, was strong and untiring. 
 But Mr. Gladstone remained firm. The reason which 
 made his moderate Liberal supporters desire it, was pro- 
 bably the reason which made Mr. Gladstone repudiate 
 it, a two-thirds majority would not be so destructive 
 of the House of Commons as a bare majority. At last 
 the 2Oth of March arrived, the day for the resumption 
 of the debate on the Procedure Resolutions. The Times 
 had struggled to the light, and had approached it just at 
 the time of the vernal equinox. It thus expressed itself 
 in a leader : " The debate which will be resumed to-day, 
 " on the first of Mr. Gladstone's resolutions relating to the 
 "procedure of the House of Commons, is almost without 
 " a parallel for gravity and far-reaching effect in our Parlia- 
 " inentary history. . . . We have no wish to discourage 
 ".the ardour of Parliamentary reformers, but we may, at any 
 " rate, express a hope that the characteristic excellencies of 
 " the English Constitution will be respected, even by those 
 "who are fascinated by the symmetry or seeming ease of 
 " movement in foreign systems. . . . It is necessary to 
 "dismiss from consideration, in the debate which will be 
 " resumed to-day, almost the whole of the argument of the 
 "Prime Minister in moving the first resolution. Nine- 
 " tenths of his speech might be applauded and adopted by 
 " members who nevertheless might feel constrained to vote 
 " for Mr. Marriott's amendment. The force of Mr. Glad- 
 " stone's contention, that it was needful to provide some 
 " power for closing debates in the teeth of obstruction 
 "which he defined to be 'resistance to the prevailing will of 
 "'the House, otherwise than by argument' stands out in 
 " striking contrast to the weakness of the case, as he pre- 
 " sented it, for placing that power in the hands of a bare 
 " majority. . . . It is agreed that, for a long period, 
 "during which the reputation of the House of Commons, 
 "as a legislative assembly, was not approached by any
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 " similar body in the world, it was found possible to dis- 
 pense with any formal rule of cloture. Our Parliamentary 
 " debates furnished a model for the imitation of foreigners, 
 " and the amount of work, legislative and other, transacted 
 "in many sessions within the recollection of the present 
 " generation, was matter of amazement to Continental and 
 " American politicians." 
 
 Such was the judgment of the Times on the struggle in 
 the House of Commons. It was an unequal struggle, 
 because of the perfidious advice given to a new member, 
 Mr. Marriott, by one in authority, who was supposed to 
 be impartial and without party bias ; advice given, it 
 appears, with the purpose of damaging Mr. Marriott's case, 
 and improving the slender chances for Mr. Gladstone. 
 Mr. Marriott's amendment originally stood thus : " No 
 " Rules of Procedure will be satisfactory to this House 
 " which confer the power of closing a debate upon a bare 
 "majority of members." The amendment was clearly 
 directed against the cloture being imposed by a very 
 small majority. Mr. Speaker Brand, however, sent for Mr. 
 Marriott before the amendment was moved, 1 and informed 
 him that "bare" was "not a parliamentary word." Mr. 
 Marriott, in accordance with the Speaker's desire, removed 
 the word, he "being unperceptive of the consequences." 
 It was a pity that the Speaker had not published a dic- 
 tionary, distinguishing such words as were parliamentary 
 from those that were unparliamentary ; he might also have 
 noted the words which are "in order" when they issue 
 from the lips of a Cabinet Minister, such as Sir William 
 Harcourt, although they are "clearly out of order" when 
 used by any other member. This code would have ex- 
 plained any variety and inconsistency which there might 
 seem to be in the decisions of the Chair, and would have 
 given a perception of the unity which doubtless underlay 
 that variety. It would have been curious also, for those who 
 are fond of antiquarian lore, to have traced how and when 
 1 St. James's Gazette, March 30. 
 
 Y
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 the word " bare " had dropped out of Parliamentary usage. 
 It must certainly have been since the date of " the Bare- 
 " bones Parliament." 
 
 To return to Mr. Marriott's amendment. As cunningly 
 altered by the Speaker, it read thus : " No Rules of Pro- 
 " cedure will be satisfactory to this House which confer 
 "the power of closing a debate upon a majority of mem- 
 " bers," as if it should be conferred only on a minority ! 
 Those that desired to oppose Mr. Gladstone's cloture, were 
 constrained to vote for that proposition ! 
 
 This ruse of the Speaker was successfully used in debate. 
 Lord Hartington urged, with force, that Mr. Marriott : 
 "did not confine his amendment to a simple majority; it 
 " extended to a four-fifths majority, or any majority." Sir 
 William Harcourt insisted that : " if the English language 
 "has any meaning at all, the declaration of the member 
 " for Brighton is that no majority shall be allowed to close 
 "debate." Thus the Ministry became participes criminis, 
 by taking advantage of that change in the amendment, 
 which the Speaker, with such cunning, had insisted on. 
 
 No. XLVII. 
 
 THURSDAY, March 30, was the day agreed upon, by all 
 parties, for the division on Mr. Marriott's amendment. 
 The Times leader contained a last despairing appeal to 
 the House against Mr. Gladstone's clotiire. It was almost 
 a cry of anguish : " Were all extraneous and illegitimate 
 " influences to be removed, were the voting to be secret, 
 " as, indeed, is the practice in some assemblies where the 
 " cloture is in force, were there no menace of resignation 
 " or dissolution, and were the local wire-pullers restrained 
 " from interfering to warp the free judgment of the House, 
 "the majority in favour of Mr. Marriott's amendment 
 "would be overwhelming. There can hardly be a Minister 
 " on the Treasury Bench who is so ignorant of what is in
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 323 
 
 " the minds of members, as to dispute the assertion that, 
 " if Mr. Gladstone's resolution be carried in its present 
 " form, it will be imposed by a majority of votes in the 
 " teeth of a majority of convictions. . . . They have it 
 " in their power to prevent a change in the Parliamentary 
 " institutions of the country, which they believe to be 
 " disastrous, and which, it is to be feared, if once admitted, 
 "will be irreparable" In spite of the Times, however, 
 that once omnipotent "Jupiter Olympus"; in spite of 
 the other newspapers, not even excepting the Daily News ; 
 in spite of all that independent men saw, and felt, and 
 loudly expressed ; in spite of the dissent, in bated breath, 
 of every " Liberal member " you met, to Mr. Gladstone's 
 proposal, yet Mr. Marriott was defeated by thirty-nine 
 votes. Where corruption has invaded the State, and 
 widely spread among the members of the Legislative 
 Assembly ; where no man has, for many years, been 
 pushed to the front rank, unless he had " committed him- 
 " self into the hands of the dark intriguers and wire- 
 pullers who never appeared ; where the highest men in 
 the State, who hold the chains of the rest and wield the 
 thongs which urge forward their slaves, are themselves the 
 slaves to a secret and irresponsible tribunal, which issues its 
 mandates, and always pursues any disobedience with the 
 most relentless malignity and vengeance ; where all pa- 
 triotism has died out, and care for self is the only feeling 
 that remains in every breast ; in such a land you have 
 but to know or divine the policy of that tribunal, and you 
 can predict the action of its Government. Nor is it diffi- 
 cult to divine that policy, if you have become possessed of 
 the master key which unlocks the dark recesses of their 
 minds ; if you have learned the end which, for centuries, 
 they have kept unswervingly in view. Thus it was that 
 the intention to push the cloture with the barest possible 
 majority was known the barest majority; that is, the 
 smallest majority which the House could be got to accept. 
 It was known ; because the destruction of the free House
 
 324 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 of Commons was a necessary means to the end in view. 
 Mr. Gladstone proposed the cloture and forced it upon the 
 House of Commons ; and yet he had on February 27, 1880, 
 uttered the following words : " The cloture is not the 
 " stoppage of a particular member who is supposed to 
 " have offended ; it is the stoppage of a debate ; and, there- 
 " fore, to bring in the cloture for the purposes which this 
 " resolution contemplates would be simply to enact that the 
 " House would punish itself and the great interests with 
 "which it is charged^ in consequence of the offence of a 
 " particular member." " Punish itself," by the loss of all 
 freedom of speech. " Punish itself," by divesting itself of 
 the power to do its duty. " Punish itself," by witnessing 
 the destruction of the House of Commons and the Repre- 
 sentative system. 
 
 The obstruction which prevailed in 1879 had, in the 
 space of two years, considerably diminished. But the 
 Liberal party had unexpectedly gained a majority in the 
 general election of April, 1880. Mr. Gladstone had wrested, 
 from Lord Hartington's hand, the office of Prime Minister, 
 which the Queen had committed to the noble Marquis. 
 The Cabinet had been cajoled into accepting the cloture ; 
 or else had been individually commanded, by their im- 
 perious masters, to accept it ; and in February, 1882, Mr. 
 Gladstone imposed it on the House, under a threat of 
 dissolution, and of a withdrawal of Liberal support from 
 every Liberal candidate who should refuse to support the 
 cloture. He who seems to have created the Obstruction, 
 imposed the cloture to put down the Obstruction. He 
 who imposed the cldture, thus poisoned the very being of 
 Parliament which he professed a pride in guiding. 
 
 At the close of the debate, on March 23, 1882, Mr. O'Don- 
 nell openly charged him with complicity in Obstruction : 
 " The Irish party were now in the position of the discarded 
 " associates of the Obstructionists on the Ministerial bench" 
 Mr.Callan, mistaking the real drift of Mr. Gladstone's efforts, 
 supposed that Mr. Gladstone had imposed the cloture in 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 325 
 
 order to be able to impose Coercion Bills on Ireland. Mr. 
 Gladstone could well have done that, in the irritated state 
 of feeling in the country, without the cloture ; at all 
 events he could have done it in one evening, by suspending 
 the Irish members, as he had done before. No ; that was 
 not the intent of Mr. Gladstone ; he was aiming, against 
 Parliamentary Government, a poisoned shaft, feathered 
 by the plumes plucked from the breast of Parliament 
 itself; while, at the same time, he was working out the 
 autonomy of Ireland, and her liberation from the rights 
 and influence of her Protestant landlords. 
 
 During the Easter recess, the Government were not 
 idle. They continued their operations for the completion 
 of the military mine which he had placed under Parlia- 
 ment. Yet the destruction of the House of Commons 
 must entail the loss of the liberties of England, and must 
 place an absolute power in the hands of the First Minister 
 of the Crown. That would be the very worst kind of 
 Caesarism. To restrict the House of Commons to its 
 legitimate functions, the statement of the grievances of 
 the people ; the voting of supplies ; and the supreme duty 
 of calling to account the advisers of the Crown, for the 
 advice they may have given to the Crown ; to reconstitute 
 the Privy Council in accordance with the Constitution of 
 the country ; such a measure would be a guarantee for 
 the liberties of the people. But such a measure, until the 
 Privy Council had been flooded with Romanist and quasi- 
 Romanist members, would, according to the Jesuit view, 
 be premature. It would preserve the liberties of England, 
 and uphold the Protestant religion as by law established. 
 
 The Times of May 8 announced the unexpected diffi- 
 culties which had met Mr. Gladstone in the prosecution of 
 his scheme. It said : " It is felt to be important to arrive 
 "at some compromise upon the Procedure Resolutions. As 
 " the matter now stands, there is no visible termination to 
 "the discussion of the first resolution itself, while the whole 
 " remaining portion of the session is almost demonstrably
 
 326 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " inadequate for dealing with the whole series, and at the 
 "same time attending to necessary business. . . . The 
 " country will learn, with a sense of profound relief, that it 
 " will, in any case, be relieved from the incubus of the clotnre. 
 " It has long been thoroughly weary of the discussion, and 
 " has signally failed to respond in any way to the frenzied 
 " appeals made to it for assistance in passing the obnoxious 
 " first rule. Everything has been done to get rip a movement 
 " among- the constituencies, but after all their exertions the 
 " local caucuses have been left very much to themselves. 
 ". . . Should the Government, in view of the defiance 
 "now hurled at it, elect to drop the Procedure Rules alto- 
 ' gether, the temper of the country is such that it woicld 
 '' have 110 difficulty in dealing with Obstruction" These 
 fears were allayed, apprehensions were gradually forgotten, 
 and suspicions were discredited, by the matter being laid 
 absolutely to rest. 
 
 The World of June 7 thus stated the position of the 
 question : " The Rules of Procedure have dropped out of 
 "sight of time; but they have not been forgotten either by 
 " the Government or by their supporters. It is quite a mis- 
 " take to suppose that tJiey are abandoned. For months 
 " before the session opened, Mr. Gladstone had been pro- 
 " claiming that this was the first and greatest of all ques- 
 " tions ; and to abandon every effort to settle it now, would 
 " be a serious blow to the reputation and authority of the 
 " Government." 
 
 The Times, on June 12, endeavoured to keep the ques- 
 tion alive by the following leading article ; and on the 
 same evening Mr. Monck asked Mr. Gladstone whether he 
 would not declare urgency for the " Prevention of Crime 
 " Bill." Mr. Gladstone's reply was entirely in the sense of 
 the Times article, and so forcibly recalled the words of the 
 article as to make persons declare that the article had been 
 supplied to the Times by Mr. Gladstone himself. The aim 
 of Mr. Gladstone was evidently to get himself urged into 
 proclaiming urgency.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 327 
 
 " To-day the House of Commons will resume the dis- 
 "cussion in Committee of the Prevention of Crime Bill. 
 " The House went into Committee on the Bill before 
 "Whitsuntide, and, in nine sittings, the measure had not 
 "advanced beyond the third line of the fourth clause, 
 " leaving fourteen pages of amendments to be considered 
 " in due course. It is not surprising that, in these circum- 
 " stances, public impatience at the slow progress of legisla- 
 tion declared by the Government to be absolutely 
 " necessary for the maintenance of order and the repression 
 "of outrage in Ireland should increase from day to day. 
 " The prevalent feeling out of doors has hitherto, for sound 
 "and solid reasons, been rather ignored than encouraged 
 " by practical politicians of every party. But the time is 
 " coming if, indeed, it be not already come when mem- 
 " bers of Parliament will be brought face to face with the 
 "demand that the obstruction of the Prevention of Crime 
 " Bill shall be overcome by resort to ' urgency.' . . . 
 " Those whose interest it is to uphold the reign of terror 
 " in Ireland are drawing fresh courage from the promise of 
 " immediate impunity. . . . We have no doubt that the 
 " Ministry, taking all these matters into consideration, 
 " appreciate the force of the demand for urgency, or some 
 " alternative scheme for expediting the business now before 
 " the House of Commons. . . . When we contemplate 
 "the unpleasant alternative at present before Parliament, 
 " our regret is revived for the tactical blunder that was per- 
 " petrated at the beginning of the session, when the Prime 
 " Minister refused to modify the cloture resolution in a sense 
 " acceptable not only to the Ministerialists, but to the Op- 
 " position. . . . If Mr. Gladstone had not persisted in 
 " demanding cloture by a bare majority, the power of closing 
 " prolonged debates by a two-thirds vote would now be in 
 " force, probably with many less disputable supplementary 
 " provisions, and would accomplish all that can be antici- 
 " pated from the re-enactment of the Speaker's Rules of 
 " Urgency in expediting the progress of the Bill now before 
 " the House."
 
 328 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Soon afterwards another leader, of a more despairing 
 character, appeared in the Times, as well as similar articles 
 in the other papers. It was evident that the Government 
 were doing all in their power to raise a feeling of indig- 
 nation, in the wearied and disgusted mind of the nation, 
 against a House of Commons which could consume so 
 much time over a " Crimes Prevention (Ireland) Bill." The 
 thoughts of the more intellectual were well expressed, and 
 the state of the country aptly painted, by the St. James's 
 Gazette of June 19 : " An attempt is apparently once more 
 " to be made to represent the cloture as demanded by a 
 " country burning with reasonable indignation at the delays 
 " which legislation encounters in the House of Commons. 
 " It is assumed that the experience of the present session 
 " must have convinced the most obstinate sceptic of the 
 " need of doing something ; and as 'something' always turns 
 " out to be another word for the cloture, the point is proved 
 " as soon as stated. ... It is well to say plainly that 
 "in the present session there has not been, and does not 
 " promise to be, any delay in the conduct of public business 
 " except that caused by the action of the Government. This 
 " may seem a strong statement, but it is one that can be 
 " completely made good. ... If there has been any 
 " delay, it has plainly been the fault of the Government. 
 " They insisted on wasting the early part of the session in 
 " debating the cloture and the rights of the House of Lords, 
 " and so using up the scanty interval which could be spared 
 "from the affairs of Ireland. . . . It is admitted that 
 " there has been no obstruction, strictly so-called no merely 
 "dilatory amendments, no see-saws between motions for 
 "the adjournment of the debate and motions for the ad- 
 journment of the House. . . . The experience of the 
 " past session has contributed nothing to the case for new 
 " restrictions on debate."
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 329 
 
 No. XLVIII. 
 
 ON June 20, 1882, Mr. Gorst asked a question of Mr. Glad- 
 stone bearing upon the cloture debate ; namely, whether 
 a Junior Lord of the Treasury had correctly described the 
 intentions of the Government of which he was a member, 
 in asserting their fixed determination to pass the Procedure 
 Rules ? Mr. Gladstone replied : " My attention has been 
 "called to the speech of the hon. gentleman, and I observe 
 "with pleasure that he has exercised considerable caution in 
 " his statements. He says that he does not pretend to ex- 
 " press the intention of the Government ; but he appears to 
 " think that the course he suggests would be a reasonable 
 "one. It is very natural that the hon. member, having 
 " perfect confidence in Her Majesty's Government, should 
 " believe that they intend to adopt a reasonable course in 
 " the matter." Later in the evening Mr. Gladstone rose to 
 move : " that the Arrears (Ireland) Bill have precedence, on 
 " every day on which it is put down, over all other orders 
 " and notices of motion, with the exception of the Pre- 
 "vention of Crime (Ireland) Bill." Mr. Gladstone hinted, 
 in his speech, very strongly at an autumn session, in order 
 to pass the " Procedure " Resolutions. 
 
 This menace appeared the more grave, and, at the same 
 time, the more ridiculous, from the list of business which 
 Mr. Gladstone expected to have accomplished beforehand. 
 After the Coercion Bill and the Arrears Bill (which latter 
 was not even in Committee), Mr. Gladstone purposed to 
 take the Budget Bill, which had not been even touched. 
 Then the Corrupt Practices Bill, the Disfranchisement 
 Bill, and the Ballot Act Amendment Bill. Of course de- 
 bates on Supply, on the Egyptian difficulty, on the new 
 Zulu war, on the Afghan difficulty, and on foreign policy, 
 must intervene. Then Mr. Gladstone promised an Irish 
 Land Act Amendment Bill, which, said he, "comprises
 
 730 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "several questions," and "he did not know that he could 
 " enumerate them all from recollection " ! What ! no 
 finality in the old Landed Estates Act ? no finality in the 
 Land Act of 1870? and no finality in the Land Act of 
 1881 ? 
 
 Mr. Gladstone's memory served him so far as to en- 
 able him to recall the "more important" points in the 
 promised Land Act Amendment Bill. He said there was 
 " the question of leases, upon which certain recommend- 
 " ations have been submitted to the Government by the 
 " Land Commissioners. There is the question relating to 
 " the labourers ; with respect to which also certain recom- 
 " mendations have been submitted. And, thirdly, there are 
 "the purchase clauses." Two months before, the Land 
 Act was, in Mr. Gladstone's eyes, too new to require 
 amendment, and too sacred to be touched. A few days 
 before, the Arrears Bill, and possibly a scheme for the ex- 
 tension of the purchase clauses, were the only amendments 
 that Mr. Gladstone purposed to entertain. He had ex- 
 pressly said so before the date of the Kilmainham Treaty, 
 in the debate on Mr. Redmond's Bill. He then declined 
 to adopt the proposals with regard to leases ; he refused to 
 make a correction in the judicial definition of "tenant's 
 " improvements." But the " appetite grows with what it 
 " feeds on." Besides, Mr. Gladstone wished to exhibit an 
 overwhelming amount of business, in order to goad the 
 House of Commons into passing the Procedure Rules, and 
 so accomplishing its own ruin. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone continued his speech by suggesting that 
 the three Agricultural Holdings Bills, and the two Scotch 
 Bills relating to endowments and entails, should respectively 
 be referred to Grand Committees. Of course the next 
 step would be to refer all Irish Bills to a Grand Committee 
 of Irish members ; and, in order to save them the incon- 
 venience of coming to London, that Committee might just 
 as well sit in St. Stephen's Green, Dublin. Mr. Gladstone 
 then proceeded to mention the Irish Sunday Closing Bill,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 33 r 
 
 the Floods Bill, the Settled Lands Bill. But immediately 
 after the Irish Bills, the Budget Bill, and the Corrupt 
 Practices Bill, Mr. Gladstone would press the " Procedure 
 " Resolutions," and if they should not be terminated by 
 August, the House could assemble again in October. Mr. 
 Gladstone concluded thus: "At the present moment I 
 "have no positive announcement to make excepting this, 
 "that the Government remain more than ever convinced 
 " that a satisfactory settlement of the question of procedure 
 " may, in one sense, be said to transcend every other measure 
 ' in this sense, that upon it depends the efficiency as 
 "well as the dignity of the great legislative instrument by 
 " which the business of the Empire is mainly carried on 
 " namely, the British House of Commons. With the evils 
 " of the present system we shall deem it our duty to deal, 
 " if any method be open to us. We shall deem it our duty 
 " not to remit the settlement of this question of procedure to 
 " another session of Parliament in the coming year. When 
 " Parliament meets for its annual session in February next, 
 " or about its usual time, whatever precisely that time may 
 " be, it shall not have about its neck the terrible embarrass- 
 " ment brought about by the present state of its rules and 
 " orders, but shall be enabled to set about with something 
 " like its old energy and dignity to the transaction of its 
 " business. At the present moment I do not go further'' 
 
 Mr. W. H. Smith at once saw in Mr. Gladstone's resolu- 
 tion, which Sir Stafford Northcote had agreed to, a blow 
 at the liberties of Parliament. He said : "that the motion 
 " was that the Arrears of Rent Bill should have precedence 
 "on every day on which it was set down. The effect of 
 " that would be to enable the Government to take other 
 "business on Government nights, and the Arrears of Rent 
 " Bill on Wednesdays, and on the morning sittings of 
 " Tuesday and Friday. No doubt it was the intention of 
 "the Government to take the Arrears of Rent Bill from 
 " day to day ; but the motion would enable them simply to 
 " appropriate the days of private members"
 
 332 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 It was whispered, at the time, when Mr. Gladstone de- 
 sisted for a little, from urging on the cldture debate, that 
 a considerable pressure had been brought to bear on Mr. 
 Gladstone, by his own followers, nay, even by some of 
 his Cabinet also, to make him give way. That was the 
 reason why he postponed the continuance of the debate 
 for a while. Then it was that the use of assassination, 
 in Ireland, became apparent. There was at once a re- 
 vulsion of feeling, in favour of a more despotic power of 
 cloture. This was remarked in the leader of the Times, 
 the next day: " We know as a matter of fact that imme- 
 " diately before the assassinations in the Phoenix Park had 
 " thrown Parliamentary business into confusion, the Govern- 
 " ment had come to acknowledge the expediency of making a 
 " concession to those who distrusted the absolute power of a 
 " bare majority. ... If the cloture resolution could have 
 " expedited the progress of the Crime Bill, the majority of 
 " two-thirds would have been at the service of the Ministry. 
 " UNLESS THE CLCTURE is TO BE USED FOR OTHER OB- 
 JECTS THAN THOSE AVOWED BY MR. GLADSTONE, THIS 
 " OUGHT TO BE ENOUGH." 
 
 The organ of Mr. Gladstone's party, The Daily News, 
 however (June 23), explained that Mr. Gladstone did not 
 intend to adhere to his offered concession. He did " not 
 " feel that overtures, made six weeks ago, with the object 
 " of saving what was left of the session, held good under 
 " the altered circumstances of to-day." According to this 
 journal, Mr. Gladstone's aim in making the compromise, 
 was " to save the time of the House." It followed that 
 Mr. Gladstone's aim in making the original proposal, from 
 which he departed in offering the compromise, was not to 
 save the time of the House. What was then his aim ? 
 The Standard, indeed, contended (June 23) that : " the 
 "marked persistence with which the Prime Minister re- 
 burred, in season and out of season, in Parliament and 
 " elsewhere, to the necessity for reforming the procedure 
 " of the House of Commons, not unnaturally led people to
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 333 
 
 " surmise that some deeper purpose underlay this unusual 
 " iteration than appeared on the surface" 
 
 On June 24, that staunch Liberal organ, the Spectator, 
 hoped that the Government did not contemplate " making 
 " that very unfortunate and unwise concession to the two- 
 " third Liberals. If the Liberals of England have got a 
 " single deep belief in them, it is that the House of 
 " Commons needs reform a great deal more than the con- 
 " stituencies themselves nay, that the resolutions on Pro- 
 " cedure err not by being too strong, but by being too weak." 
 
 On June 26, the Conservative Whip, Sir W. Hart Dyke, 
 proposed that the cloture resolution should be postponed 
 until after the other resolutions on Procedure. To this, 
 Mr. Gladstone objected decidedly. On this, the Times, 
 next morning, produced a leader, in which it said : " It can- 
 " not be doubted that, setting aside the cloture, the House 
 " would have readily adopted the remaining resolutions, so 
 " far at least as they were concerned with ' Procedure,' in 
 " the strict sense, and not with the scheme of delegating 
 " work to Grand Committees. Among the rules which 
 " would be in force, had the Government refrained from 
 " challenging a conflict upon the first resolution, is one the 
 " effect of which would be to prevent such waste of time 
 " as was witnessed last night." 
 
 It must, therefore, have been apparent to the editor of the 
 Times, that Mr. Gladstone's aim in proposing the cloture re- 
 solution was not to save the time of the House, but to effect 
 some other object. This fact was still more apparent to the 
 Morning Advertiser, which, on June 27, said in its leader: 
 " What does it all mean ? . . . What is the cause of the 
 " singular tolerance of the obstructive opposition of the Home 
 " Rulers to the Prevention of Crime Bill, which the Prime 
 " Minister takes so much pains to exhibit? Again, how are 
 " we to interpret the recent jeremiads over the perversity 
 "of the House of Commons, and the hard fate of the 
 " Government, which has been prevented by that perversity, 
 "and solely by that, from passing any one of the mea-
 
 334 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "sures to which it is pledged, and the value of which it 
 " thinks cannot be over-estimated ? And finally, what is 
 " the secret of the appeal to the public to put pressure upon 
 " the House of Commons to accept the reforms of procedure 
 " which Mr. Gladstone pronounces necessary, but which he 
 " asserts it is unwilling to consider ? " 
 
 No. XLIX. 
 
 THE Times, and other morning papers, at the end of June, 
 1882, announced, with all the parade of paragraph and 
 heading of" large caps," that the Government had arranged 
 to sit continuously, to hold an " all-night sitting," on 
 the Irish Coercion Bill. It was confessed that there had 
 been no actual obstruction ; but " yet the Bill had occupied 
 " a very long time." So the all-night sitting was announced 
 for Friday, June 30, as a distinct challenge to the Irish 
 members to obstruct the business. Nay more ; this pre- 
 liminary announcement of the intention of the Government, 
 was a trailing of the Parliamentary coat-tail before all the 
 constituencies of Ireland, with the challenge " to tread upon 
 " it if they dared." Of course the constituencies were not 
 slow in ordering their representatives to resist, to the 
 utmost, this new arbitrary act of the Government. Mr. 
 Gladstone had irritated the Irish, and put them on their 
 mettle. To make matters worse, the Government also gave 
 notice of four or five pages of new amendments to the 
 Bill, with a view of increasing its stringency, at the very 
 time that they challenged the Irish members to obstruct, 
 or else to own themselves to be craven hounds, and 
 permit the House to finish it at one sitting. On Thursday 
 June 29, Mr. Gladstone rose, directly after question time, 
 and gave the following notice : "Sir, Her Majesty's Govern- 
 " ment are very sensible of the great difficulties in which 
 " the House is placed with respect to the remainder of the 
 " time of the present session. We shall endeavour to get 
 " on as far as possible with the clauses of the Prevention
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 335 
 
 " of Crime (Ireland) Bill in Committee during the present 
 " week, even if it entails the necessity of asking the House 
 "to-morrow to prolong its sitting further than usual." 
 Thus Mr. Gladstone threw down the gage, and Messrs. 
 Parnell & Co., who probably were in the secret, were not 
 slow in picking it up. 
 
 Towards the morning of Saturday, Mr. T. P. O'Connor 
 appealed to the Chair against " the chatterings of Mr. 
 " Lyulph Stanley ; " but no notice was taken of his appeal. 
 Then Mr. Redmond spoke, and Mr. O'Connor called Mr. 
 Lyulph Stanley to order ; but the Chairman, Mr. Shaw- 
 Lefevre, declared that he had not heard anything to justify 
 his interference. Mr. Callan, however, insisted on what he 
 designated as " the shameless conduct " of Mr. Stanley ; 
 whereupon Colonel Carrington rose to order, and asked if 
 such an expression might be applied to a member. Mr. 
 Lefevre, however, merely told Mr. Redmond to continue 
 his speech. This Mr. Redmond did, and openly charged 
 the Ministerial members with "endeavouring to import 
 " bad blood into the discussion and precipitating a scene." 
 At six o'clock in the morning, Sir W. Harcourt declared 
 that " he had never seen so wanton, intolerable, and un- 
 " justifiable a waste of public time; fourteen hours having 
 " already been consumed in the consideration of unreason- 
 " able amendments, and none more unreasonable than the 
 " present one." Mr. Dwyer Gray retorted that " never had a 
 " more intolerable and unjustifiable an attack been made 
 " on members ; " and he accused the Home Secretary, Sir 
 William Harcourt, of having been asleep all the time. Sir 
 William replied that "the statement was certainly not 
 " true." Mr. Healy maintained that the Irish members 
 had not moved a single motion for the purpose of causing 
 delay. Mr. Sexton and Mr. Parnell also repudiated the 
 charge of obstruction. Sir W. Harcourt then declared that 
 " the obstruction had been deliberate, and had been in- 
 " tended beforehand, and carried out adroitly ; but its ini- 
 " quity had not concealed the deliberate intent of blocking
 
 336 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " the measure." He invited " the House and the country 
 " to note the conduct of the Irish members." True, Sir 
 William ! most true ! it had been deliberately intended ; 
 and the ultimate purpose was the passing of the gagging 
 rules. Mr. Parnell laid the blame on Sir William and 
 the Government, in " deliberately attempting to excite the 
 " temper of the House." True, Mr. Parnell ! Most true ! 
 Mr. Sexton, Mr. T. P. O'Connor, Mr. Leamy, and Mr. 
 Healy, also exonerated the Irish members from blame, 
 and cast it upon the Government ; Mr. Biddulph expressed 
 his opinion that it was all " a miserable farce." The Chair- 
 man then said that as "a number of members had systema- 
 " tically obstructed the proceedings, he considered it his 
 " duty to name them." He named sixteen Irish members. 
 Mr. O'Donnell called the statement of the Chairman " an 
 " infamy." The Chairman retorted by saying that Mr. 
 O'Donnell had made a " ridiculous statement." Mr. 
 O'Donnell said he had been " foully named, although he 
 " had been absent all the night." The sixteen members 
 were then suspended, and Mr. Speaker was sent for. Mr. 
 Callan then complained that he had been named, although 
 he had not opened his lips since Dr. Playfair had been in 
 the Chair, and exclaimed that the Chairman " had stated 
 " an utter falsehood ; " but, the report states, that " no 
 " notice was taken by the Speaker of these interruptions." 
 The suspended members then left in a body ; and the 
 House proceeded with the Prevention of Crimes (Ireland) 
 Bill. Presently nine more members were suspended. 
 
 There is no doubt that some of those Irish members had 
 been dealt with in a flagrantly unjust manner. Thus a 
 good cause of complaint was given to the Irish constitu- 
 encies, while their ire and indignation were adequately 
 aroused, and they very naturally protracted the discussion 
 with the sputterings of their wrath. On the morning of 
 Saturday, July I, a letter from one of the suspended 
 members, Mr. Healy, appeared in the Times, justifying 
 their conduct on the ground that the Government had just
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 337 
 
 put down four and a half pages of amendments and new 
 clauses to the Bill which they were endeavouring to force 
 so rapidly through the House. Did the Government not 
 know their own minds during the long intervals between 
 the discussions on the Bill ? or did they take this extra- 
 ordinary course in order to make the Irish members believe 
 that they had been cheated, bamboozled, beguiled, and 
 flummoxed ? Did Mr. Gladstone do this in order effectu- 
 ally to kindle the rage of the Irish members, and brace 
 them up to more daring efforts, and more glaring scandals, 
 and a course of conduct which would enable him to abolish 
 the House of Commons altogether ? 
 
 Why did not the Government knowing beforehand 
 that the Bill would meet with bitter and prolonged oppo- 
 sition, if not obstruction make it as short as possible, so 
 as to preclude extended debate? Why did the Govern- 
 ment insist upon crowding details, one after another, into 
 the measure? Why did they not merely arm the Irish 
 Executive with exceptional powers, and leave the Irish 
 Privy Council to frame the necessary rules for the exercise 
 of those powers ? One clause would then have been suffi- 
 cient. In order to show the prevailing opinion, the remarks 
 of the St. James's Gazette, of July i, are worthy of being 
 reproduced : " Impulsive as ever, the Government had re- 
 ' solved upon forcing the Bill through an all-night session, 
 " and far on into the next, which is this passing day. To 
 " carry out this idea with security and ease, the machinery 
 " of relays was resorted to. A certain number of Govern- 
 " ment members were engaged to sit till an early hour this 
 " morning ; they were then to be relieved by others, who 
 " were to face the Irish till eight o'clock ; at which hour 
 " a third relay was to come up smiling, and continue the 
 " contest of physical endurance. And so forth, and through 
 " the day : which at the time we write is still shining upon 
 " a heated rabble of legislators quite unfitted by temper 
 " and fatigue for legislation. 
 
 " What gave the impulse to this sudden and startling 
 
 z
 
 33 8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "resolution? What did it? . . . Possibly the natural wild- 
 " ness of the impulse was not untempered by calculation. . . . 
 " Possibly there was even more in the Ministerial expedient, 
 " which will make the June to fitly sitting famous in Parlia- 
 " mentary records. It is occasionally advisable to exasperate 
 "your enemy ; because then he may be impelled to do 
 " something desperate by way of retaliation, which on the 
 " whole you would rather he did. . . . This at any rate 
 " was quite upon the cards : an all-night and all-day sitting 
 " being nothing less than a challenge to downright obstruction, 
 " and obstruction downright might be counted on. As the 
 " hours passed by, and the Irish members saw themselves 
 " beaten by superior staying powers, nothing could be more 
 "likely than that they would become irritated, wrathful, 
 " unmannerly. . . . To say nothing of what, to many a 
 " more or less suspicious mind, will appear a set design of 
 " irritating these notoriously excitable men into such extra- 
 " vagances of resistance, as would warrant their extrusion 
 " from the House before the contest of physical endurance 
 " had been fought out. Better surely to have gone to the 
 " necessary end by more straightforward means. Better to 
 " have solved the difficulty by the application of martial 
 " law to Ireland ; for to all appearance it must come to 
 " that sooner or later." 
 
 Martial law in Ireland would have stopped the crime. 
 Suspension of Irish members would have stopped obstruc- 
 tion. But then the Representative system would not have 
 been destroyed. It must also be remembered that there 
 had been no obstruction by the Irish members. They had 
 merely offered that opposition in committee which Mr. 
 Gladstone had already declared to be "legitimate," and 
 which they were bound, in duty to their constituents, to 
 offer. The St. James's Gazette of July 3, in common with 
 other papers, admitted as much : " Of ' obstruction ' clear 
 " and absolute there was none. Nevertheless, when at about 
 " nine o'clock on Saturday morning Mr. Redmond became 
 "particularly provoking, the Chairman drew out a prepared
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 339 
 
 " list of sixteen members, and named them for suspension 
 "in a batch. This list not only included Mr. Parnell him- 
 " self and all the more pertinacious of his following, but 
 " some who declare that they never opened their lips at all 
 " on this memorable occasion." Dr. Lyon Playfair in fact 
 regarded the sixteen members as "habitual criminals," 
 against whom there was no specific charge, but who (he 
 was pleased to think) should not be suffered to remain at 
 large. If they had obstructed, he should have warned 
 them severally at the time. But he had found in them no 
 fault that he could point to. Perhaps he was emulous of 
 the glory and the G.C.B., which had been obtained by Mr. 
 Speaker Brand, in performing the coup a" Mat. Mr. Speaker, 
 doubtless flattered by this attempt at imitation and what 
 more flattering than imitation ? would clearly not permit 
 Dr. Playfair's conduct to be called in question, on Monday. 
 The Speaker is infallible; and the Chairman of Com- 
 mittees, who apes the Speaker, must therefore be infallible 
 likewise. 
 
 No. L. 
 
 ON the 4th of July, the public journals took fright at the 
 progress of Mr. Gladstone's inroad on the liberties of the 
 House, and the new conquests that, with Speaker Brand's 
 powerful assistance, he had made during the last "all- 
 " night's sitting." It was an adroit and stealthy conquest ; 
 for no one, at the time, perceived it ; and, therefore, it was 
 unresisted. It will be remembered that Speaker Brand, 
 on January 31, 1881, defined Wilful Obstruction as arising 
 when members, although speaking in order as to the ques- 
 tion before the House at the time, are yet guilty, by reason 
 of an agreement between themselves to speak on the 
 question, in order to take up the time of the House. As 
 the Speaker refrained from applying his definition, it was 
 neither challenged nor understood, and, therefore, was by 
 degrees accepted. In the recent all-night sitting, however,
 
 340 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 the Speaker claimed the right, under the definition, to 
 punish a number of members for doing that which each 
 of them had a perfect right to do. The effect was to 
 furnish the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees with 
 a curious kind of doture. For that object, all that the 
 Speaker has to do is to declare that members have entered 
 into a combination to speak. The Chairman of Com- 
 mittees, Dr. Playfair, went beyond the Speaker in declaring 
 that, for a member to be guilty of obstruction, it is not 
 necessary for him to be bodily present. He may have 
 spoken and gone home before the Chairman, through 
 weariness or inconvenience, had imagined the existence 
 of a combination to speak between that member and 
 others. The mere recollection of his speech will be enough 
 to condemn him to suspension or expulsion. 
 
 When these facts were calmly considered in the morn- 
 ing, the country became uneasy, and the newspapers 
 reflected the uneasiness. The St. James's Gazette, for 
 example, said (July 4) : "As men ought to be satisfied 
 " with results which they have deliberately planned, it is to 
 " be presumed that the Government are satisfied with what 
 " has come of the all-night sitting. A wholly unexpected 
 " extension has been given to the powers of the Speaker 
 " and the Chairman of Committees, in regard to Obstruc- 
 " tion. . . . The Government may be of opinion that, 
 " to furnish the quivers of Sir Henry Brand and Mr. 
 " Playfair with an additional arrow, is a gain of sufficient 
 " magnitude to be worth an all-night sitting. . . . As 
 " neither the suspension of twenty-five members, nor the 
 " general demoralization and loss of temper which has 
 " come upon the House as a consequence of Saturday's 
 " proceedings, are good things in themselves, we must look 
 " elsewhere for an explanation of the Ministerial determina- 
 " tion to provoke them." 
 
 On Tuesday, July 4, Mr. Gladstone's urgency motion 
 was to be brought forward. But during question-time, 
 previously to that motion, Mr. Ashmead Bartlett asked 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 341 
 
 whether, if the motion for urgency were carried, it would 
 prevent a discussion being raised, on the usual motion for 
 the adjournment of the House, on the important question 
 of our relations with foreign countries ? 
 
 The Speaker : " In the event of the motion being 
 " agreed to, it will become my duty, in pursuance of the 
 " resolution, to frame such rules and orders as, in my 
 " discretion, appear proper under the circumstances of 
 "the case." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone then moved the motion for urgency, on 
 which there was, of course, a division without previous 
 debate. After that division, the Speaker said : " The 
 " House having resolved that the state of public business 
 " is urgent, I desire to lay on the table of the House 
 " certain rules, framed by ME, for the regulation of the 
 " business of the House while the state of public business 
 " is urgent." 
 
 The Clerk then read the new rule, which was to the 
 effect, that when it appeared to the Chairman of the Com- 
 mittee that it was the general sense of the Committee that 
 the question should be put, that motion should be forth- 
 with put ; and if it were decided in the affirmative by a 
 majority of 3 to I, the main question should be at once 
 put. 
 
 Thereupon Mr. McCarthy asked for the indulgence of 
 the House, while he stated that the hon. members who 
 usually acted with him had agreed to the following resolu- 
 tion : "That, inasmuch as the Irish Parliamentary party 
 " have been expelled from the House of Commons, under 
 " the threat of physical force, during the consideration of 
 " a measure affecting the vital rights and liberties of 
 " Ireland ; and as the Government, during the enforced 
 " absence of Irish members from the House, have passed 
 " material portions of that measure through Committee, 
 " thus depriving the representatives of the Irish people of 
 " the right to discuss and vote upon coercive proposals for 
 " Ireland : we, therefore, hereby resolve to take no further
 
 342 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " part in the proceedings of the Committee on the Coercion 
 " Bill, and we cast upon the Government the sole responsi- 
 " bility for the Bill which has been urged through the 
 " House of Commons by force, violence, and subterfuge ; 
 " and which, when passed into law, will be devoid of moral 
 " force, and will not be a constitutional act of Parlia- 
 " ment." 
 
 It was well observed at the time, that if the suspension 
 of the twenty-five Irish members on Saturday, July I, was 
 a godsend to the Irish party, the resolution read by Mr. 
 McCarthy clinched and secured the fullest benefits to the 
 Irish or Gladstonian cause. It was certain to restore the 
 diminishing subscriptions from America ; it was certain to 
 restore the popularity of the cause in America : it was 
 certain to rehabilitate it in Ireland ; it was certain to 
 irritate the minds of the English members and their con- 
 stituencies against the Irish, and make them consent to a 
 loss of their own Parliamentary liberties, in order to gag 
 the Irishmen. The Irish knew that all resistance to the 
 Prevention of Crime Bill was useless ; they also knew that 
 it was necessary to light up the dying embers of " Patriot- 
 " ism." Mr. Gladstone had of course his reasons for desiring 
 the all-night sitting. Irish patriotism on the one side, and 
 possibly the hatred of the liberties of Parliament on the 
 other both which were flaccid, flabby, and flagging 
 would be revived by an all-night sitting, and the suspension 
 of twenty-five members. There was something there to 
 appeal to the imagination of the people. 
 
 It was, nevertheless, a curious fact that, after Urgency 
 had been voted, no less than sixty amendments to the 
 Prevention of Crime Bill appeared on the notice paper ; 
 and of these, no less than fifty-five were given by Mr. 
 Trevelyan, the Chief Secretary for Ireland. Either the 
 Government had been the fountain-head of Obstruction ; 
 or else the Government kept back the most vital and most 
 contestable points of their scheme of coercion, until after 
 the rule as to Urgency had been voted. Whichever it was.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 343 
 
 the Government of Mr. Gladstone stood self-convicted of 
 the attempt to strangle the House of Commons, and deal 
 a fatal blow at the liberties of England. 
 
 On July 5, Mr. Speaker Brand said to the House, 
 when asked how long the Rules of Urgency would be 
 operative : " If in the course of my duty I should think 
 " it right to state, in pursuance of the resolution, that the 
 " state of public business is no longer urgent, then these 
 "rules will cease to take effect" And further, "At the 
 " same time, I think it right to state that the House hascom- 
 " mitted to me very large powers, and that if these rules now 
 " laid upon the table are not sufficient for the purpose, my 
 "power to frame further rules is by no means exhausted" 
 On the i ith, the Times printed a letter from the Right Hon. 
 Edward Pleydell Bouverie, whose acquaintance with the rules 
 of the House was well known. His independent authority 
 was therefore regarded as of great weight. He said of 
 the House of Commons : " Liberty, in that place, seems to 
 " be rapidly dwindling into permission from a Minister or 
 " a caucus to speak one's mind, so long as it is in accord- 
 " ance with their views, and no longer." He referred to 
 the recent action of Mr. Speaker Brand, as " a proceeding 
 " which has entirely ignored the ancient and accepted rules 
 " of Parliament." Of the act of the Chairman of Com- 
 mittees, he said : " Such a practice, if once sanctioned, may 
 " lead to great abuse, and can be worked to silence and 
 " exclude from the House any member, however able, re- 
 " spected, and orderly he may be, on the mere ipse dixit of 
 "the Chairman." Mr. Bouverie saw plainly enough the 
 danger to liberty of speech the very life of the House of 
 Commons ; but he did not see that both Mr. Gladstone 
 and Mr. D'Israeli had been sapping the representative in- 
 stitutions of the country, in order, it would appear, to the 
 repeal of laws obnoxious to their cause, and to supplant 
 Protestantism by Romanism in England and Scotland, as 
 they had already done in Ireland. Mr. Bouverie did not 
 consider that the results which he foresaw and bewailed,
 
 344 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 were results that had been carefully calculated and in- 
 tended. He saw the effects ; he did not argue to the 
 cause. 
 
 On the loth of July, Mr. Gladstone announced that the 
 House would presently be adjourned until October, when 
 the Procedure Resolutions would be pressed on, to the 
 exclusion of all other subjects. It was well known, at 
 that time, that if Mr. Gladstone had accepted the two- 
 thirds majority for the cloture, all the Procedure Resolutions 
 could have been passed without delay, and the necessary 
 business of the administration could have been finished as 
 well. The announcement of the loth was therefore taken 
 as a plain intimation that he would insist upon the cloture 
 by a bare majority. 
 
 The coup d'etat of the Speaker last year had not been 
 forgotten. The coiip d'etat of Dr. Lyon Playfair, the 
 Chairman of Committees, was fresh in memory. Those 
 officials of the House had carried matters with a very high 
 hand, at a time when debate was supposed to be unrestricted, 
 and while the liberties of the House and country were 
 imagined to be intact If those things could be done 
 under the green tree, what would be done under the dry ? 
 What would be the condition of the House of Commons 
 when Mr. Speaker and the Chairman of Committees 
 should be armed with Mr. Gladstone's despotic Rules of 
 Procedure ? 
 
 On July 14, there appeared another letter in the Times ; 
 this time from Sir C. Gavan Duffy : " If the danger from 
 " Obstruction was a serious one, it is full time to consider 
 " whether it has not been encountered by methods which in 
 " the end may prove more fatal to the character and influence 
 " of Parliament i.e., by the inordinate and illegitimate ex- 
 " ercise of authority. I do not feel at liberty to trouble you 
 " with details of forgotten transactions, but I ask you to 
 " allow me to state that in my belief, during the last twelve 
 " months and more, rules have repeatedly been imposed on 
 " Irish members, to limit and impede debate, for which it
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 345 
 
 " would be impossible to find any precedent in the journals 
 " of the House, and which, had they been enforced against 
 "John Pym and John Hampden, might have strangled Eng- 
 " lish liberty. 
 
 " With respect to the latest transaction of the Chairman 
 " of Committees, if it be permissible to take a rule framed 
 " for individual cases, and suddenly apply it, without notice 
 " or warning, to a batch of cases, to include in this batch 
 " members who were not present, and others who had con- 
 " fessedly given no offence, and that the officer setting this 
 " example of arbitrary authority is to be sheltered from criti- 
 " asm, 1 see no security for liberty of speech or action in the 
 " case of members who are so unfortunate as to forfeit the 
 "sympathy of tlte majority" 
 
 That was the deliberate opinion of a man of experience 
 in Parliamentary affairs. His experience and acuteness 
 had led him to the same conclusion as that which Mr. 
 Bouverie had arrived at ; namely, that the liberties of Eng- 
 land were being destroyed. The mistake which both of 
 them made was that they accounted for Mr. Gladstone's 
 action by assuming that it sprang from oversight or stupidity 
 an assumption which, except in this case, they would 
 have strenuously denied, as became defenders of Mr. 
 Gladstone's character for intellect and prudence. On all 
 other occasions they both would have loudly asserted that 
 Mr. Gladstone possessed the greatest acumen in England, 
 and that he had at his elbow men who would effectually 
 have guarded him from committing any oversight. Or 
 perhaps we may say that neither of these gentlemen had 
 the " courage of their opinions " (to use a vile but common 
 phrase) ; they neither of them ventured to say, even to 
 himself, that only because Mr. Gladstone approved an 
 end, therefore he loved the means by which it was to be 
 attained. 
 
 The "restriction and abridgment of the liberty of 
 " debate," be it remembered, had been before the House 
 ever since its opening in February, as the question which
 
 346 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 was vital to the very existence of the Ministry. It had 
 divided the Ministerial party, and nearly wrecked the 
 Government ; and yet Mr. Gladstone had held on to it 
 with an inexplicable tenacity, and had refused all compro- 
 mise in regard to it. It had aroused more keen debates in 
 the House, and a warmer controversy out of doors, than 
 had been devoted to any domestic issue of late years. It 
 had been put in the forefront of Mr. Gladstone's pro- 
 gramme, as a matter which had to be considered and 
 decided before any other should even be entered upon. 
 Yet it was not nearly so large nor so important a question, 
 as Mr. Gladstone admitted on July 13, as another which 
 had all the while been kept in the background. The 
 reason was, doubtless, that the cloture was to be first 
 passed, in order that it might be used as a potent engine, 
 by means of which the other and more important matter 
 could be passed ; a more important matter, namely, 
 Home Rule for Ireland. Not only Home Rule for Ire- 
 land, but the disintegration and breaking up of Parlia- 
 ment into numerous smaller assemblies, in such a way as 
 to weaken, or rather annihilate its power. The Liberal 
 Minister and the Radical Cabinet were the instruments 
 for breaking up the Liberal party ! 
 
 NO. LI. 
 
 ON the Qth of August, 1882, the Lord Mayor of the City 
 of London gave his usual banquet to the Ministers ; and 
 Mr. Gladstone seized on that festive occasion to poke up 
 the slumbering embers of indignation against the House 
 of Commons. He spoke first of a "thoroughly searching 
 "and drastic reform of procedure" being necessary to re- 
 store the House of Commons to a normal efficiency. He 
 then asserted that the empire had so much increased, and 
 that there were so many new calls for legislation, that it
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 347 
 
 was utterly impossible for the House of Commons to per- 
 form the duties of legislation. Other bodies must, there- 
 fore, he said, be instituted to do part of that work of 
 legislation. In those words he clearly pointed to a very 
 extended scheme of Home Rule. Then again, he con- 
 tinued, the House of Commons itself must be reformed, 
 in order to enable it to perform any of its duties. Lastly, 
 he warned the country that they must dismiss from their 
 minds all flimsy and secondary objections, and unmanly 
 fears ; and drive from their imaginations all the bogies 
 by which men are frightened against great changes : 
 such as " tJie destruction of the representative system" 
 " the liberties of the people" and "the establishment of 
 " an absolute and irresponsible monarchy, or rather, 
 " empire." 
 
 On the 1 4th, Mr. Gladstone made the following state- 
 ment, on the question, in the House of Commons: "As 
 " I have already stated, we propose that when the House 
 "meets on the 24th of October it shall address itself to 
 " the great question of Procedure. To deal with that question 
 " is, in point of fact, the object and, so far as we can foresee, 
 " the sole object for which we ask the House to meet at that 
 "particular season of tJie year. ... I need not say that 
 " the session, so far as concerns legislation proposed by the 
 " Government, has been a session of utter ruin and dis- 
 " comfiture such as has never before occurred. . . . W/ien 
 " the House meets it is our intention to resume the consider- 
 " ation of the resolutions as they stand'' On that occasion, 
 Mr. Gladstone declared that he was no longer bound by 
 his written promise to accept the two-thirds majority ; but 
 would adhere to his intention of allowing the cloture to 
 be imposed by a simple majority. The next morning 
 (i5th) the Times remarked, in its leader: "To those who 
 " have reflected upon the magnitude of the change which 
 "will be effected in the House of Commons and the 
 " Constitution by the cloture, this facile adoption, abandon- 
 "ment, and readoption of that sweeping measure will
 
 348 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "savour of unworthy levity. . . . The advances made 
 " during the session in the art of summarily putting down 
 " inconvenient speakers are in the circumstances far from 
 " reassuring. . . . It is not in human nature to submit 
 "without resentment to the imposition by sheer force of 
 " the will of the Government for no other visible reason 
 " than that it is the Government's will. ... It is a pecu- 
 " liarly unfortunate weapon for the Liberal party to forge 
 " in such circumstances." 
 
 The Times of September 28 recurred in its leader to 
 the "proposal for the revival of Grand Committees. No 
 " appeal to precedent or to ancient forms of procedure can 
 " conceal the fact that this is in reality a very considerable 
 " innovation. But it is a proposal of great interest, which 
 "deserves serious attention and careful discussion." It 
 seemed to have been forgotten that the avowed end and 
 aim of the proposals, was the suppression of wilful ob- 
 struction ; and it was assumed that the suppression of 
 obstruction was the same thing as the compulsory closing 
 of debates at the will of a Prime Minister and his obedi- 
 ent party. Moreover, the efficiency of the legislative 
 assembly was regarded as identical with its expeditious 
 working, as if " slow and sure " were the same thing as 
 "scamp it, and hurry-scurry." Undoubtedly the talkers 
 are not always good workers ; nor is discussiveness often 
 joined with solid judgment. But the cloture would not 
 tend to get men of solid judgment into the House. Even 
 if one or two such reserved and silent thinkers should get 
 there, yet the talkers would absorb the time of the House, 
 and the cloture would not enable the others to speak. 
 The very possibility of closing the debate sharply, would 
 make the bumptious, fussy men all the more anxious to 
 thrust themselves in, and make themselves heard. The 
 Rules of Procedure were not proposed in order to increase 
 the vigour and efficiency of Parliament; but in order to 
 strangle it, in its old age and dotage. 
 
 At the meeting of the House, in October, it was well
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 349 
 
 known that Mr. Gladstone had withdrawn his compromise 
 on the subject of the cloture, and would agree to nothing 
 short of its imposition by a bare majority. Yet he had 
 made it clear that no question of principle was herein 
 involved. At a moment of unpopularity, when it seemed 
 that he would lose the resolution altogether, he wrote 
 to Mr. Gibson offering to accept the two-thirds majority, 
 on condition of the opposition assisting to pass all the 
 other resolutions. Thus he denied the substratum of 
 principle. In October, Mr. Gladstone had regained much 
 popularity by supposed successes in Egypt, and he seemed 
 to have thought he was then in a position to advance 
 much nearer to a destruction of the liberties of the House ; 
 reducing it to such a helpless condition, that he could 
 repeal the Act of Settlement, and all other Acts which 
 stood in the way of the Romish Church. He insisted 
 upon the cloture by a bare majority. What he had before 
 been ready to sacrifice for the sake of convenience, he 
 now insisted on for the sake of his ulterior aim. 
 
 Yet men of all parties, and in all stations, still entertained 
 a most irreconcilable aversion to his principles of proce- 
 dure. But the Caucus, which had been instituted as a step 
 to all these Gladstonian measures, compelled members to 
 vote against their consciences and their openly declared 
 opinions. A Minister who acts thus, ought to be able to 
 assert, in his defence, that he entertained a reasonable and 
 very strong conviction, that no other course would serve 
 the interests of the State. Such an argument Mr. Glad- 
 stone precluded himself from using, by pleading that 
 cases of intervention under his rule of cloture would be 
 exceedingly rare. If so, he denied the ground of ex- 
 pediency, in favour of his proposed rule, as he had before 
 denied the ground of principle. Why, then, should he 
 have desired to get into his hands a fatal power which 
 could at any time be used with overwhelming effect against 
 the liberties of the House and nation, and against the 
 Protestant religion as in this kingdom established ? The
 
 350 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 resolution concerning the Standing Committees, and the 
 delegation of powers, was sufficient to manifest the cloven 
 foot. He proposed to delegate, to different bodies, the 
 powers of legislation in detail, on different subjects, thus 
 opening up vast opportunities for manipulation in legis- 
 lation ; and enabling the question of Home Rule to be 
 at once settled favourably to the wishes of the Irish 
 Nationalists. 
 
 Although the Procedure of the House of Commons was 
 within the competence and purview of the House itself; 
 yet it will not be denied that any change in procedure 
 which affects the liberty of subjects, or the freedom of 
 speech of their representatives, could not be dealt with 
 by the mere will and fiat of the House of Commons, and 
 still less by the decree of a Prime Minister, backed by his 
 Caucus. Such a thing touches the most vital part of the 
 Constitution ; and could certainly not be legally effected 
 except by the Sovereign and the estates of the realm. 
 That some great and dark purpose lay behind Mr. Glad- 
 stone's proposals, was generally felt. So the Times, on 
 October 23, remarked : " The resumption of Parliamentary 
 " business at this most unusual and inconvenient time of 
 " year, proves that the Government have in view, by these 
 " Procedure Resolutions, something of the most extreme and 
 " urgent importance? 
 
 If Obstructionists had been dealt with at the first, in 
 accordance with the ancient and acknowledged rules of 
 the House, the whole cancer could have been easily cut 
 out, and there would have been no need for the cloture. 
 Mr. Gladstone refused to act thus ; but, on the contrary, 
 he favoured and encouraged obstruction, and allowed his 
 front bench to teach the art of obstruction ; and then he 
 furnished ample opportunities of obstruction ; and, at last, 
 when the public mind had been sufficiently irritated by 
 the obstruction, he proposed his resolutions on procedure. 
 If the obstruction was really the work of between twenty 
 and thirty members, who formed the Irish Nationalist
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 351 
 
 party, why would not a two-thirds majority have been 
 always enough to overcome them ? And if it was the 
 work of that party, why did Mr. Gladstone and Lord 
 Hartington secretly arrange with Lord Salisbury and Sir 
 Stafford Northcote last year (1885) to increase that Irish 
 party, by their Reform and Redistribution Bills, to ninety 
 members ? It was not that the disease was disliked ; but 
 the drastic remedy was desired. Obstruction hampered 
 the freedom of discussion in the House ; but Mr. Glad- 
 stone's remedy was certain to destroy that freedom. 
 
 On Oct. 24, Mr. Gladstone thus nailed his colours to 
 the mast : " The House is engaged in the discussion of the 
 " first resolution, and to that first resolution in its main 
 " proposition we undoubtedly intend to adhere. That was 
 " the declaration ivith which we bade farewell to the subject 
 " in the last sitting, and it is the declaration which I repeat 
 " as the ground of our proceedings." 
 
 Turn now to Sir Stafford Northcote's speech on 
 Oct. 27 : " There had been two or three very curious revela- 
 " tion s made in the course of that debate. One, for which he 
 " had not been at all prepared, zvas that a Cabinet Minister 
 " did not iinderstand the ground upon which the rules were 
 "framed, and did not know the resolutions themselves. . . 
 " The Prime Minister had said that this rule was not in- 
 " tended to deal with cases of wilful obstruction, which he 
 " said ought to be dealt with and punished in a different 
 " manner. The revelations which had been made in the 
 " course of this debate showed clearly that these rules were 
 " not aimed at obstruction, but at something else ; and vvhat 
 " he wanted to know was what that something else was ? He 
 " confessed that he looked upon these rules with very great 
 " suspicion, and tliat the more the debate proceeded the greater 
 " that suspicion became." 
 
 Thus Sir Stafford Northcote evidently let his knowledge 
 escape him, of the conspiracy which was being carried on 
 for the subversion of British liberties. "The rules," he 
 said, " were not aimed at obstruction, but at something
 
 352 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "else;" and "a Cabinet Minister did not understand the 
 "ground upon which the resolutions had been framed." 
 The secret aim of Mr. Gladstone had not been revealed to 
 his Cabinet! 
 
 At this juncture (Oct. 28), the Papal organ, the Moniteur 
 de Rome, had a leading article in defence of Mr. Gladstone. 
 It concluded with these words : " The Conservatives resist 
 " the cloture from a stupid spirit of opposition ; the Irish 
 " do the same because it is their interest to do so, and 
 " because the measure is ostensibly directed against them- 
 " selves. Yet it is to be hoped that, after the new ten- 
 " dencies manifested by the Parnellites, and, above all, 
 " after the public promise recently made by Mr. Herbert 
 " Gladstone, a member of Parliament and son of the Prime 
 " Minister, that ' the Government, while maintaining the 
 " ' Imperial supremacy in Ireland, is disposed to yield them 
 " ' the government of all Irish affairs,' after this, it is to be 
 " hoped that the Irish party will not oppose the Govern- 
 " ment any more. Besides, if those Irish members are pro- 
 " perly inspired, they will not contravene any projects of a 
 " Minister who has the best disposition, and whose actual 
 " position is so firm that he can, now more than ever, o-ver- 
 " come any coalition which the Conservatives could offer 
 " to the Obstructionists." It was a curious fact that after- 
 wards (Nov. 8) Mr. Gladstone used the very arguments 
 which had appeared in the organ of the Pope. 
 
 On Oct. 30, the Times, in announcing that the division 
 on the cloture resolution was to be taken on the Thursday 
 after, asserted a complicity between Mr. Gladstone and 
 Sir Stafford Northcote : " The confidence with which the 
 " Ministerial Whips have summoned their men for that day 
 " is, no doubt, founded upon an understanding witJi the 
 " Opposition ; " and again : " // must be by an understanding 
 " between the front benches. . . . But Mr. Gladstone has 
 " shown no disposition to concede anything." It added 
 that " a great many forms of severe pressure " are exerted ; 
 but " the present attitude of the Irish party has relieved
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 353 
 
 " the Ministry from the threatened attack of one section 
 " of the most determined enemies of the doture" They 
 were obedient to the orders from Rome, which had been 
 announced in the Moniteur de Rome. At the Pope's 
 bidding they ceased to resist Mr. Gladstone. The House, 
 be it remarked, had already vastly extended the operation 
 of Mr. Gladstone's doture resolution by deciding that the 
 Chairman of Committees shall exercise the same powers 
 as the Speaker. 
 
 Other papers of the same date, as for example the 
 St. James's Gazette, also hinted at complicity between the 
 two front benches : the Conservatives " so far seem to have 
 " been indifferent to the chances of attenuating the evil, 
 "which the course of the debate has, up to this time, 
 " afforded them ; and in letting these chances go unim- 
 " proved, they have made their victory on the main 
 " question more improbable than it would otherwise have 
 " been ; " if they had acted otherwise, " the Opposition 
 " would at least have stood acquitted of all complicity with 
 " the extinction of free debate in the House of Commons" 
 The Journal de Rome, another organ of the Pope, took the 
 Conservative party to task for offering any opposition at 
 all to Mr. Gladstone's Procedure Resolutions. It was re- 
 markable that the Papal organ did not utter a word of 
 censure against Sir Stafford Northcote on that score. Sir 
 Stafford, as we have seen, was suspected of " complicity." 
 The Journal de Rome also urged, with all the authority of 
 the Pope, that the Irish members should support Mr. 
 Gladstone; and the Times of Nov. I informed us that 
 " attempts, which may possibly be successful, had been 
 " made to persuade the Irish members " to support the 
 Government. 
 
 Yet it must not be supposed that Mr. Gladstone was 
 what the Americans call "thorough," or "a whole man." 
 He was a man of two halves, anti-Papal in words, but 
 very Papal otherwise. In his speech, Mr. Gladstone avowed 
 the ground of his preference for the bare majority doture 
 
 A A
 
 354 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 to be a desire to prevent any interference with his Irish 
 policy according to Irish ideas: "Under the two-thirds 
 " rule it would be possible for the larger minority (Con- 
 " servatives), on the matter of closure, to overrule the 
 " majority (Gladstonians) and the smaller minority (Irish) 
 " combined." 
 
 No. LI I. 
 
 OF course the poor stupid Radical party have always 
 believed Mr. Gladstone to be a Radical because of his 
 brave words. They did not judge him by his acts, and the 
 fruits of those acts. They were misled by empty words. 
 Still less did they, in memory, put all his acts together, 
 and so judge, from their succession to their tendency. 
 Therefore it was that the Radicals believed also that the 
 cloture was a Liberal measure, and would be of use in 
 passing Liberal measures. 
 
 The Radicals ran on that false scent, in full cry. The 
 Irish ran on the true scent, and knew that Mr. Gladstone's 
 cloture was intended to pass Roman Catholic measures 
 (including Irish autonomy). The front Conservative 
 bench, being in the plot, took care to disorganize the really 
 opposing Conservative party ; and so the simple cloture 
 was carried that very night, or rather on the early morning 
 of November 3, by the rejection of Mr. Gibson's amend- 
 ment. The majority was 84. The Irish members had 
 been very reticent during the debate ; but, before its close, 
 Mr. Parnell stated the views of the Irish party. Their 
 views were thus summarized by the Times. 
 
 " To disorganize Parliamentary parties, to exacerbate 
 " Parliamentary conflicts, and to bring the House of Com- 
 " mons into disrepute, by driving one side into oppressive 
 " violence and the other into reckless and rancorous resistance, 
 " are among the means through which Mr. Parnell and his 
 "followers hope to accomplish the disruption of Imperial
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 355 
 
 "unity. In the operation of the cloture by a bare majority 
 " they see the beginnings of a state of things in which 
 " they hope to find their opportunity. For these reasons, 
 " and,perhaps,for others not yet apparent, they have refrained 
 "from joining with the Conservatives in an attack upon 
 " the weakest point in Mr. Gladstone's scheme." 
 
 Remark the curious combination of Radicals, Democrats, 
 Roman Catholics, and Nationalists, which conspired to 
 accomplish that end. The Irish would feign have stayed 
 away, in order to ward off the growing suspicion. But 
 they could not be spared. Too many Liberals were 
 wavering as to the two-thirds majority. Therefore the 
 Irish had to vote against the two-thirds majority. More- 
 over, the same Prime Minister who annulled the sanctity 
 of contract in Ireland, when the fulfilment would benefit 
 Protestant landlords, insisted on receiving the quid pro quo 
 when it was to benefit himself. It was on October 31 that 
 the following intelligence was telegraphed from Dublin to 
 the St. James's Gazette :" It is stated that, in return for 
 " the support of the Irish party on the cloture, Mr. Glad- 
 " stone has undertaken to introduce a fresh scheme of Irish 
 " legislation next session, embracing a further development 
 "of the Land Act in the direction of peasant proprietary ; 
 " an extension of the franchise ; and a scheme of local 
 "government? 
 
 On this the St. James s Gazette remarked (November 
 2) : " That there exists some kind of tmderstandingto use 
 " the least invidious term of those open for choice between 
 " tlie Irish party and the Government, no man in his senses 
 " can doubt" 
 
 The truth of those suspicions became very apparent on 
 the 7th of November. The Irish party, wishing for some 
 public ratification of the compact, put up Mr. O'Connor 
 Power to speak. Mr. Gladstone, in his reply, on that day, 
 said : " I will speak with frankness what is my own mind 
 " with respect to those Irish representatives who are accus- 
 " tomed to term themselves the Irish party. It appears to
 
 356 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " me it is possible to discern two founts of feeling in the 
 " party which is called Home Rulers. Their object is to 
 " establish in some way or other what they sometimes call 
 " a national, sometimes an independent, it may be a separate 
 "legislative assembly. Now, sir, let me make this frank 
 " admission. There is a portion, at any rate, of that party 
 " who, to attain their end, wish to make the transaction of 
 "business in t Jus House impossible ; whereas there are un- 
 " questionably others who, believing it to be vital to the 
 " existence of their country that they should attain 
 " legislative independence, still turn to the machinery 
 " which exists, to attain their purpose. / have my own 
 " opinions upon tJie interests of Ireland. About the Irish 
 "vote I have no business and very little inclination to 
 " speak. But I have had to do for many years with Irish 
 " affairs, and I am entitled to give my opinion without an 
 "undue amount of arrogance. But / believe the complete 
 " and effective sy stern for the business of the House is essen- 
 " tialfor meeting tJie wants of Ireland. If there be no time 
 "for English and Scotch legislation, there will be no time for 
 " Irish legislation. . . , Was the hon. member in jest 
 " when he said, Why do you not take advantage of this 
 " opportunity to advance the power of local self-government 
 " in Ireland? Well, sir, I tell the hon. gentleman there is 
 " not a subject wliich I could name on which I personally 
 "feel a more profound anxiety than on the local self- 
 " govermnent of Ireland, and local self-government upon a 
 " liberal and effective basis" 
 
 Lest any remarks of ours, on that speech and on the 
 result of the division on the cloture, should appear pre- 
 judiced and partial, let us seek for the judgment of others. 
 Let us obtain the expressions of contemporary opinion, in 
 different newspapers, home and foreign. On November 
 9, the Times expressed its judgment in the following 
 leader : 
 
 " The ' Irish party ' have undoubtedly been the authors, as 
 " they boast themselves, of the cJianges in procedure wJiich the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 357 
 
 "House of Commons is now carrying out. It would be 
 "curious, but it would not be altogether surprising, if they 
 "were to profit indirectly by a revolution primarily directed 
 " against their subversive designs. Lord Randolph Churchill 
 " has lately held out the hand of fellowship to tJie followers of 
 "Mr. Parnell. . . . The Prime Minister's argument 
 " addressed to the Irish members was that when the cloture 
 " is in force public business will be rapidly despatched, and 
 " that among the measures the Government have at heart 
 " there is none more important than c local self-government in 
 " Ireland on a ' liberal and effective basis? What Mr. Glad- 
 " stone means by this phrase we do not presume to say : 
 " but in Ireland it will be too probably interpreted to mean 
 " Home Rule in some form. Otherwise, it will be asked, why 
 " should the promise be held out to Mr. Parnell and his fol- 
 " lowers as an inducement to vote in favour of the cloture ? " 
 
 The Standard said, on Mr. Gladstone's speech, that : 
 " However much his words may be explained away, he can 
 "have wished to imply nothing less than that, in any plan 
 " for the rearrangement of the business of Parliament, the 
 " demands of tJie Home Rulers shall not be ignored. The 
 "Prime Minister has voluntarily contracted obligations 
 " towards the Irish Separatists which they may call upon 
 " him at any moment to discharge." 
 
 The Roman Catholic and Irish Freeman s Journal re- 
 marked " that this is not the first time on which Mr. 
 "Gladstone has indicated that the question of Home Rule 
 " was in his thoughts ; but he has never yet declared so 
 "clearly and distinctly his opinion of its necessity, or the 
 " extent to which it should be conceded, as he did yesterday. 
 " The significance of that utterance can scarcely be ex- 
 " aggerated. Mr. Gladstone could not or would not dare 
 " to use words of this kind except there was some real 
 " meaning behind them." 
 
 The French Dttbats proclaimed that the adoption of the 
 cldture in England was a Revolution : " The House of 
 " Commons abandons its old and glorious traditions, and
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " becomes a machine for making laws by the hour. . . . 
 " To allow the right of the House to shut the mouth of one 
 " of its members deals a mortal blow at one of the most 
 " essential principles of Parliamentary institutions as hitherto 
 " understood across the Channel. This principle of unlimited 
 " liberty once abolished, the whole structure collapses." 
 
 To these extracts, some portions of Mr. Cowen's 
 excellent speech of Nov. 10, may be added. " The House 
 " had not heard much of the Obstruction in the last Parlia- 
 " ment. The Obstruction last session was offered to one 
 "specific measure ; last Parliament it was to a whole batch 
 " of measures : last session it was to one line of policy ; 
 " last Parliament it was to the entire policy and action of 
 " the Government. . . . On a certain occasion the Prime 
 " Minister made the well-known declaration about its being 
 " the object of his life to thwart the policy of Lord Beacons- 
 " field. The obstruction was offered, not only to foreign, 
 " but also to domestic policy. Only the formal business of 
 " the Government could be got through by dint of desperate 
 "effort and struggle. The Irish members got the blame; 
 " the late Opposition got t/ie benefit. The Irish members 
 "pulled some of the chestnuts out of the fire. Some of them 
 " who were -in the late Parliament, if they were so minded, 
 " could a tale unfold which would considerably disturb tlie 
 " equanimity of cantankerous and censorious critics. If the 
 " hon. member for Cavan would produce some passages from 
 " his Parliamentary biography, they ^vould be instructive. He 
 " might recollect a summer Wednesday, three years ago, 
 " when he acceded. to a request to oppose a Bankruptcy Bill. 
 " That was Irish obstruction. The fingers on the dial plate 
 " were Irish ; but not the mechanism tJiat worked them. 
 " That Bill was beaten, and it had never advanced to a like 
 " stage since. ... If the cloture were put in force to close 
 " a discussion after ten speeches had been made, why not 
 " after two ? . . . All that enabled the House to triumph over 
 " autocracy for centuries, they were asked to destroy, and they 
 " were asked to reduce the Assembly to a registry office
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 359 
 
 "for the decrees of caucuses, and the judgments of the 
 "party press. This must be the inevitable result. . . . 
 " What kind of judgment could be given where determina- 
 " tions preceded discussion, where one set of men deliberate 
 " and another set of men decide ? If that was to be the case 
 " and ' vote as you are told ' was the motto why need 
 " members be there ? Instead of six hundred, sixty, or even 
 "six, would suffice. The decisions of the constituencies 
 " could be formulated by draughtsmen, and the executive 
 " could put them in operation. Spontaneous public opinion 
 " he respected, when it was genuine ; if he differed from 
 " it, he deferred to it ; but he paid no regard to opinion that 
 " was manufactured, cast like metal plates to pattern. They 
 " all knew the process. A central body passed a resolu- 
 " tion ; it was sent into the country, and it was adopted 
 " by a dozen or twenty irresponsible people, who signed a 
 " petition or a memorial to the Prime Minister. Of these 
 " dubious documents the Prime Minister had received I/O 
 "or 1 80, the constituencies knowing nothing of the men 
 " or of their meetings. It was a fact that this was done ; 
 " we had heard of organized hypocrisy, and he called this 
 " organized imposition. They had heard about an organized 
 " hypocrisy, but this was an organized imposition." 
 
 Lord Randolph Churchill had written a letter to the 
 Times urging the Conservative party to offer every species 
 of obstruction to the remaining resolutions, if the cloture 
 resolution should be passed. He had all along, ever since 
 he was his father's secretary in Ireland, cast in his lot very 
 much with the Irish Roman Catholic party ; and was 
 suspected of urging obstruction in order to get the cldture 
 resolution put in force without delay, so as to pass the 
 remaining resolutions. On the I3th of November, Lord 
 Randolph Churchill placed on the paper upwards of fifty 
 new amendments to the Procedure Rules. Several of his 
 friends also placed fresh amendments on the paper. 
 
 On the same day, the Times predicted that " the new 
 " weapon (the cloture) would not be allowed to rust " ; and
 
 360 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 that the Speaker would probably close the discussions on 
 the remaining resolutions, and pass them in silence, should 
 the discussions seem to him to be unduly prolonged. " It 
 " is not improbable (it continued), that the threats of re- 
 " sistance a Voutrance, which have been lately heard, have 
 " been inspired as much by a desire to test the pressure of 
 " the rule upon the Opposition, as by a revolt against the 
 "exercise, by the majority, of what the minority regard as 
 " an unrighteous power." 
 
 If the Times was behind the scenes, still more could 
 the Papal organ, the Moniteur de Rome, of November 10, 
 divulge the secret in an article entitled " CLOTURE AND 
 " MR. GLADSTONE," which was probably little assuring to 
 Englishmen. It said : " Moreover, it is very well known 
 " that Mr. Gladstone has, in pigeon holes, certain mea- 
 " sures which he has very much at heart ; and that he 
 " desires to realize, without delay, all the reforms which he 
 " has in view. The cloture he regards as an indispensable 
 " means of arriving at his end. It is, be it remembered, 
 " not the first time that Mr. Gladstone has struck a blow 
 " at the British Constitution. The Disestablishment of the 
 " Protestant Church in Ireland was a measure as Radical 
 " as the cloture. The same may be said of the Land Act." 
 
 " It was known that Mr. Gladstone had certain projects 
 " next his heart," and that the cloture resolution was passed 
 in order that he might realize them ! What were those pro- 
 jects ? Were they measures of Home Rule such as Parnell 
 would desire? Probably. No man but Mr. Gladstone 
 could have passed the cloture. He was there to do it ; and 
 (as was openly said by the St. James's Gazette of No- 
 vember 14) " if he has, in this matter, been an instrument 
 " in the hands of others, his friends may boast that he has 
 "been an indispensable instrument." Who, then, could 
 congratulate themselves? The Irish Roman Catholic 
 party. For many years they had sought to degrade, dis- 
 integrate, and destroy the English House of Commons ; 
 and they, with Mr. Gladstone's help, have succeeded.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 361 
 
 Their victory was the overthrow of Parliamentary liberties 
 in England. The Irish party rejoiced over the blindness 
 of Englishmen, who could no more see Mr. Gladstone's 
 real intention, than the Arabs saw the impending rush of 
 the English troops at Tel-el-Kebir. The Irish knew that 
 the adoption of the doture was an act of suicide on the 
 part of the House of Commons. They had goaded and 
 vexed the House by obstruction, as they had been taught 
 and told to do, and then smiled grimly as they saw the 
 knife drawn across the throat of their victim, and the life- 
 blood welling out in distressing flood. Those who found 
 pleasure in shooting unsuspecting landlords from behind a 
 hedge, could well laugh a ghastly laugh when those land- 
 lords destroyed themselves. For years the aim of the Irish 
 has been to destroy that Parliament which, for eighty years, 
 had kept from them their own Parliamentary institutions. 
 They have wreaked their vengeance now. 
 
 No. LIII. 
 
 THE Irish party, besides tasting the sweetness of revenge, 
 knew also the aim which Mr. Gladstone had in passing the 
 doture ; they were aware of " the projects next his heart." 
 England's necessity has always been Ireland's opportunity. 
 The concord of English parties excludes Ireland's oppor- 
 tunity. Whenever party strife runs high, whenever party 
 contentions are embittered, then each English party will sell 
 its birthright for a horrid mess of Irish pottage, and grant 
 to Ireland her most extravagant demands, in return for a 
 quantum of Irish support. Future bitterness of parties 
 was what Mr. Sexton looked for under the doture. 
 " Hitherto (he said), English politicians have been able to 
 "remain personal friends in spite of party differences ; 
 "under the doture there will grow up hatreds and rancours 
 " which will eat their corroding way even into private life." 
 Each party will in turn feel the effects of being gagged
 
 362 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 and beaten, without having been allowed to say a word in 
 self-defence. This oppression and tyranny will surely 
 engender rancour. When party rancours, animosities, 
 hatreds, and revenge, run high, then will be the time for 
 the Irish to drive good bargains ; or, at least, these passions 
 will serve as excuses for the traitor Ministers of the future, 
 when they give way to Irish Roman Catholic demands, 
 while simulating an ardour for Protestantism. 
 
 The debates of November 15 revealed to the astonished 
 world the fact that Lord Beaconsfield, no less than Mr. 
 Gladstone, had aimed blows at the liberty of speech in 
 Parliament. The following passage is taken from a speech 
 of Lord R. Churchill : 
 
 "They were much indebted to the right hon. baronet 
 " the member for Mid Kent (Sir W. Hart-Dyke) for having, 
 "in the debate on the first rule, initiated them into the 
 " practices of Government ' Whips ' in communicating con- 
 "stantly, and, indeed, always, to the Chairman of Com- 
 " mittees the wishes and the will of the Prime Minister of 
 "the day. His right hon. friend, the member for Mid 
 " Kent, had told the House that, during the Parliament of 
 " 1874, he never left the elbow of the Chairman of Com- 
 " mittees, and used to say to the Chairman, ' If this discus- 
 " ' sion is not put a stop to, what will the Prime Minister say ?' 
 " Although the Prime Minister had professed to be greatly 
 " shocked, he had not denied the existence of the practice." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone replied : " The noble lord had adverted 
 " to a statement of a very extraordinary character, which 
 "was made by the hon. baronet the member for Mid Kent, 
 " with reference to the conduct of the Whips when the 
 " Chairman of Committees was in the chair, and which the 
 " noble lord had said was allowed to pass without con- 
 tradiction. For his own part, however, he had been so 
 " much struck by that statement, that he had made a note 
 " of it, for the purpose of commenting upon it. ... He had 
 " been so frequently called over the coals for making long 
 "speeches, that he had not thought right to refer to the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 363 
 
 " matter before. . . . Never, either directly in his own 
 " person, or indirectly through either of the Whips or any 
 " member of the Government, had he presumed to interfere 
 " with the judgment of the Chairman of Committees upon 
 " any question awaiting settlement by the House." 
 
 Lord John Manners, an ex-Cabinet Minister, replied to 
 Mr. Gladstone : " If the right hon. gentleman meant that 
 " neither he, nor any member of a Government with which 
 " he had been connected, had any communication either 
 "with the Speaker, or the Chairman of Committees, he 
 " stated something which made a very great draught upon 
 " the credulity of the House. Who could complain, if a 
 "Minister thought that a member was unduly protracting 
 " the debate, or not speaking ad rein, that he should com- 
 " municate with the Chairman on the subject ? " 
 
 Mr. Gladstone asked how it was possible he could be 
 aware of any communications that passed between the 
 Chair and any member, that were made in an undertone, 
 without leading to the interruption of the debate. 
 
 Lord J. Manners : " Exactly ; but did the right hon. 
 "gentleman, with his vast experience, mean to contend 
 " that the right hon. member for Kent was the only official 
 " gentleman who had pointed out to the Speaker, or to the 
 " Chairman of Committees, that some member was unduly 
 "protracting debate? Surely it was often done, and it 
 "would be highly inconvenient if this practice were 
 " abandoned." 
 
 Mr. Raikes, the Chairman of Committees under Lord 
 Beaconsfield, spoke subsequently : " The statement of his 
 " hon. friend was one in which he said his official duties 
 "during the last Parliament led to his being constantly 
 " at the elbow of the Chairman of Committees of Ways 
 " and Means, and urging him to get through the work as 
 " far as possible with regard to the views of the late Prime 
 " Minister. Noiv as far as his own recollection went, Ids 
 " hon. friend was, no doubt, constantly at his elbow, owing 
 " to tJie circumstance of tlie chair being placed where it was,
 
 364 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " and of his Jwn. friend being obliged constantly to pass in 
 " and out of the House" 
 
 The session was at last brought to a close, as soon as the 
 House had passed Mr. Gladstone's suicidal resolutions. 
 Yet the session itself was a complete answer to the asser- 
 tion that those resolutions were at all necessary. It began 
 by passing two Bills, which caused great excitement and 
 raised very acrimonious feelings ; so that the debates upon 
 them were necessarily long, the Crime Bill, and the 
 Arrears Bill. Yet a large amount of other most important 
 legislation was also passed. Namely : An Act to codify 
 the law relating to Bills of Exchange, Cheques, and Pro- 
 missory Notes (45, 46 Vic. c. 61) ; the Married Women's 
 Property Act (c. 75) ; the Municipal Corporations Act 
 1882 (consisting of 260 sections and 10 schedules); and 
 the Settled Land Act(c. 38). So that the argument which 
 had been used to get the cloture passed, was evidently a 
 false one. 
 
 That both parties of the House of Commons conspired 
 to destroy the House of Commons, by passing Mr. Glad- 
 stone's resolutions, was plain to every one. It was openly 
 hinted at in many papers. Take, for example, the St. 
 James s Gazette, of Dec. 2 : " The Rules of Procedure, 
 " and especially the cloture, have not been fought with 
 " the courage and persistence which the Opposition ought 
 " to have displayed. The greatest of the customary rights 
 "of the House of Commons has been surrendered with 
 " no just cause shown, and the resistance offered to the 
 "change has been of the feeblest kind. . . . With rare 
 "exceptions, the Opposition failed to appreciate the im- 
 "portance of the crisis. They did not realize that freedom 
 "of debate includes all other freedoms, and that if this 
 " goes, the tenure on which the rest are held is simply the 
 " forbearance of the majority. At least, if the Opposition 
 " did realize this, they were far too sparing of effort to 
 " avert the catastrophe." 
 
 This agreed with the testimony of Lord Randolph
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 365 
 
 Churchill, in reply to a deputation from Manchester 
 (Times, Nov. 27): "The constitutional function of an 
 " Opposition was to oppose and not support the Govern- 
 " ment, and those functions Jiad during the three sessions of 
 " tJiis Parliament been systematically neglected or ineffectually 
 " carried out. Legitimate opportunities had arisen for con- 
 " flict which ought to have resulted in the overthrow of the 
 " Ministry or in great damage thereto ; and those oppor- 
 " tunities had been allowed to pass by unavailed of." 
 
 The Papal organ, the Moniteur de Rome, of Jan. 18 
 1883, evinced the foreknowledge of the Curia, as to the 
 probable opportunities for bringing the cloture rule into 
 effective operation. It prophesied correctly that, in the 
 succeeding session of Parliament, Mr. Gladstone would 
 extend the Borough Franchise to the counties, and added 
 that " probably, from the ardent discussions to which such 
 " a Bill will give rise, it will give an opportunity for the 
 " application of the principle of the cloture" 
 
 The diplomatic despatch sent by the American Minister, 
 to the Speaker of the House of Representatives in Wash- 
 ington (Times, Jan. 31, 1883), mentioned some facts and 
 views which are well worthy of notice : " The proposed 
 " expedient for the more speedy despatch of business did 
 "not originate with Mr. Gladstone; he adopted it as his 
 " own. ... A safer cure will perhaps be found in en- 
 " larging the scope and functions of local government, especially 
 " in tJic case of Ireland, and the tendency of opinion seems 
 " to be in this direction. ... It will be very natural 
 " that relief from the block of business in Parliament should 
 " ere long be sought in the shifting of some of its duties to 
 " other shoulders." 
 
 Mr. Lowell, that eminent Minister of the United States 
 Government, had learned first that Mr. Gladstone was not 
 himself the originator of his Rules of Procedure, but that 
 they had been given to him to carry ; and secondly, that it 
 was in contemplation to give to Ireland a Parliament of 
 her own, under the pretext of lightening the duties of the
 
 366 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Imperial Parliament, both of which measures must have 
 the effect of lessening the dignity and weight of the House 
 of Commons. 
 
 There was a further element in the plot ; namely, break- 
 ing up the existing parties and constituting a new National 
 party. 
 
 The Papal organ, the Moniteur de Rome, on the 2Oth of 
 November, 1882, made, in the following terms, a prediction 
 which doubtless proceeded from a perfect knowledge of 
 the intrigues which had been set on foot by the Vatican 
 itself : " An important reconstitution of the political parties 
 " of England is now proceeding. We do not anticipate the 
 " retirement of the present Premier ; but even if he should 
 " retire, that would not interfere with the accomplishment 
 "of the programme for the new classification of Parlia- 
 " mentary forces. At present, there is in course of pre- 
 " paration in London by means of agreement between 
 " the two sides, and the foundation of a great political 
 " Club a serious alliance between the Liberal party and 
 "a fraction of the Conservative party, with the object 
 " of forming a working majority which would be able 
 " successfully to resist the Radicals, and the ultra-Tories. 
 " The formation of this great party, which we designate as 
 " a centre party, will become in England, the same as the 
 " Liberal-Conservative party, announced at Stradella, will 
 " be in Italy. There are constant meetings and social 
 " gatherings in London, with a view of coming to a mutual 
 "understanding on the policy to be followed, and the 
 "means of organizing. It is certain that the names of 
 " certain Peers and other statesmen, who are known to 
 "attend those meetings, give us reason to predict the 
 " success of the new party." That was a public announce- 
 ment of a scheme which had long been entertained ; which 
 D'Israeli had mentioned in " Coningsby " and his other 
 novels, and which I have heard the Jesuits, and even Pope 
 Pio Nono himself, discourse about. 
 
 A leader in the Times of March 8, 1883, may be quoted
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 in evidence of the state of parties at that date. It forms a 
 curious commentary on the revelations of the Pope's or^an 
 is to the machinations of the Jesuits : The break-down of 
 he old machinery of party government is perhaps the most 
 striking political phenomenon of the present day. Each 
 "party sees it clearly enough in the case of the other and 
 each does its best to ignore it in its own. Among Liberal 
 "politicians the disorganization of the Conservative paity is 
 " a favourite topic. It has been pointed out, until everybody 
 tired of hearing it, that they have no longer any dis- 
 tinctive principles, that they cannot formulate any policy 
 capable at once of rallying their own forces and of 
 'recommending itself to the country at large, and that the 
 " habit of barren criticism is carried so far as to reduce each 
 section to isolation. It is all perfectly true, but it is not 
 the whole truth. The Liberal party is in much the same 
 plight as the Conservative, though circumstances help it to 
 "preserve a better semblance of unity." 
 
 On the 2nd of May, Lord Granville and Mr. Gladstone 
 attended a banquet at the National Liberal Club and 
 reproduced the warnings, which they had previously got 
 inserted in the Daily News, Standard, and other news- 
 papers. Lord Granville said: "I should be curious to 
 know whether the country is aware that during tJie late 
 ^ Administration the practice was-perfected by a small section 
 of the House of Commons, who had least respect for the 
 traditions and dignity of that House. I should be inqui- 
 *ive as to whether it is believed that a large party in the 
 House of Commons at this moment pursue a veiled system 
 "of Obstruction, constructed on such scientific principles tJiat 
 "it makes it almost impossible to formulate a particular 
 " complaint at any particular moment, and which all the same 
 "greatly impedes the Government, who have the great 
 Responsibility of carrying on public legislation, and 
 whether this does not go on notwithstanding the assis- 
 tance that has been given by the improved procedure 
 " adopted."
 
 368 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Mr. Gladstone followed, and said : " It has been due, as 
 " Lord Granville has so admirably shown, to the artful 
 " development of a system of Obstruction, and to the arrival of 
 " a state of things in Ireland perhaps the most formidable 
 " wJiich has marked the checkered history of that country" 
 
 It will be observed that Mr. Gladstone's famous Rules of 
 Procedure did not content him ; he aimed at something 
 beyond. Moreover the charge which these two leaders of the 
 Liberal party brought against the Conservative party was 
 that the latter were pursuing a policy of Obstruction. The 
 aim of the Jesuit party was, by means of Obstruction, so 
 to discredit the House of Commons that Representative 
 Government could be abolished. Mr. Gladstone therefore 
 charged the Conservative party with supporting that policy, 
 and doing all they could to discredit the House of Com- 
 mons. In doing so, he admitted that the cloture, and the 
 rules of Procedure, over which so much time had been 
 wasted in the preceding year, were without the beneficial 
 efficacy which he had promised ; they were, indeed, meant 
 only to break up the House, just as an old building would 
 be ruined by picking out the stones which support it near 
 the foundation. 
 
 No. LIV. 
 
 IN June, 1883, the Irish members, on going into Committee 
 on the Corrupt Practices Bill, prolonged the debate by " a 
 " succession of speeches, reiterating the same assertions." 
 The next day, in a morning sitting, the same tactics were 
 pursued by Lord Randolph Churchill and Sir W. Lawson. 
 The whole sitting was then talked out by the Irish Nation- 
 alist members. That was on a Friday. Not content with 
 that achievement, Lord Randolph Churchill, Sir H. Drum- 
 mond Wolff, and Mr. Gorst threatened to repeat the tactics 
 on Monday. The Times of June n remarked that: 
 " It is scarcely possible to hope for effectual help from the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 369 
 
 " stringent code of rules on which so large a part of the 
 " time of Parliament was spent last year, and for the sake 
 " of which, not only was the unusual strain of an autumn 
 "session inflicted on members, but the long-established 
 " amenities of party warfare were dismissed as worn-out 
 "follies. If the new rules, and especially the drastic 
 " remedy of the cloture, had been easily available, it is not 
 " likely that, during the past four months, diversified by 
 " incidents like those of Thursday night and Friday after- 
 " noon, their application would not have been attempted. 
 " . . . It is difficult to define an extreme case ; but if the 
 "impunity with which a small set of members, speaking in 
 " succession from the same benches, talked out the Alcester 
 " Dotation Bill, last week, be a precedent, we cannot hope 
 "for much assistance from the new rules, . . . since 
 "Ministerialists and Opposition would be allied in with- 
 " standing a renewed attack on the vitality of Parliamentary 
 " Government" If the Times, instead of arguing thus : 
 'the rules were not applied, and therefore they are not 
 'applicable'; had argued thus: 'the Government and 
 ' Opposition, although allied, did not apply the rules which 
 ' all men know to be easily applicable ; therefore both 
 ' Government and Opposition, for some reason, desired the 
 ' Obstruction to continue ' ; if they had argued thus, then 
 they would have made patent a long-continued conspiracy. 
 On the 1 8th of June, indeed, the Times hinted that the 
 Government had actually aided the Obstructionist tactics, 
 by repeatedly changing their plans. And further aid the 
 Government gave, according to the Times, by making 
 various concessions to the Home Rule party, in order to 
 encourage them in their Obstruction. It appears that Mr. 
 Bright, in order to remove suspicion from his Government, 
 had charged the Conservative party with allying themselves 
 with " a faction avowedly bent on paralysing Parliamentary 
 " Government, in order to wrest from the weariness or the 
 "fears of the English people, the repeal of tJie Act of Union? 
 This, Sir Stafford Northcote stoutly denied in the House ; 
 
 B B
 
 370 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 and the Times remarked, on Mr. Bright's accusation, that 
 " Ministers must not allow themselves to suppose that they 
 "can shift from their own shoulders, by vague complaints 
 " and unsupported taunts, the responsibility, which primarily 
 " rests upon them, for the conduct of business in the House 
 "of Commons." It added : " Mr. Parnell's tactics of last 
 " week can be indefinitely renewed, and will be, so long as 
 " there is any prospect of making them gainful. ... It 
 "was not then supposed, from the demeanour and the 
 " language of the Prime Minister, that the party of exas- 
 " peration would be permitted to justify their proceedings, by 
 "pointing to the trophies of victory" Mr. Bright also said : 
 " The Conservatives are found in alliance with the Irish 
 " rebel party, the main portion of whose funds come from 
 "the avowed enemies of England, whose (the Conser- 
 "vatives') oath of allegiance is broken by association with 
 "its enemies." 
 
 On June 18, Mr. Bright, in the House of Commons, 
 thus defended his speech in Birmingham : " The right 
 "hon. gentleman (Sir Stafford) objects to my statement 
 " that some members of the Conservative party have been 
 " acting in alliance with certain gentlemen among the 
 " Irish members. There can be no doubt about their acting 
 " with them. I am free to admit that the term alliance is 
 " capable of a meaning which I did not intend to give it 
 " I had no idea at all that there was any kind of arrange- 
 " ment ; but I found them acting together." As to the 
 Liberal party, and their hand in the conspiracy, Mr. 
 O'Connor Power, a Home Rule member, said : " It is a 
 " notorious fact, that during the last Parliament, there "was 
 " not an occasion, when what were rightly or wrongly called 
 " obstructive tactics were practised against the Government by 
 " a certain section of Irish members, that they did not get the 
 " direct as well as indirect support of the Liberal party}' 
 
 Mr. Gladstone postponed the controversial matters in- 
 volved in the estimates, especially those relating to 
 Ireland, to the end of the session, when the Irish always
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 37I 
 
 wield a power out of all proportion to that contributed by 
 the rest of the House. The Irish knew their power, and 
 employed it to obstruct ; so that the Times exclaimed on 
 August 14, 1883: "The Government and the House of 
 Commons appear to be at the mercy of the Irish members 
 "in this matter (i.e. the Irish Registration Bill)." The 
 next day, the Times printed a jeremiad on the state of the 
 House of Commons, still making what I regard as the old 
 mistake of supposing that Mr. Gladstone's rules were in- 
 tended to put an end to obstruction, instead of perceiving 
 that the obstruction was apparently in order to get further 
 rules passed, so as to put an end to Representative Govern- 
 ment. The Times exclaimed : " The disorganization and 
 " the degradation of Parliament are foremost among the 
 " means by which, according to a cynical reckoning, Great 
 Britain is to be worried into the abandonment of Ireland, 
 " and the surrender of loyal Irishmen to the tender mercies 
 "of Land Leaguers, or Invincibles. . . . It is time for 
 " the House of Commons to turn its face towards the men 
 " who are doing all in their power to drag Parliamentary 
 " institutions in the mire. . . . The House of Commons 
 " will be degraded to the level of those who deliberately 
 " import into political controversy the manners of the pot- 
 " house and the malevolence of the Riband Lodge. 
 ' It is impossible to suppose that the House will acquiesce 
 " in the impotence to which it seemed to be doomed on 
 ;< Monday night. If it were possible, the future of Parlia- 
 " mentary Government in England would indeed be dark. 
 "... The conspicuous and incontestable collapse of the 
 " cloture and the whole artificial system of rules on which the 
 " House of Commons wasted the better portion of its time 
 " and energies last year, has amply justified our criticisms. 
 " . . . At the next general election the party of exaspera- 
 " tion will be largely reinforced ; and the probability of this 
 " will certainly not be lessened by the passing of the Irish 
 " Registration Bill, which was carried through committee 
 " yesterday." It was in order to compel the House to pass
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 this Bill, that the obstruction was organized, and that Mr. 
 Gladstone and the Speaker failed to make use of the new 
 rules in order to put it down. Mr. Gibson declared that 
 the Registration Bill was really a measure for extending 
 the franchise in Ireland ; and Mr. Trevelyan gave it a 
 wider scope than it originally had, in deference to the de- 
 mands of the Irish members. It was for this Bill that the 
 Government also dropped the Constabulary Bill, and the 
 Sunday Closing Bill. That is to say, they dropped a Bill 
 whose object was to put down crime, together with a Bill to 
 improve the moral character of the people, in order to pass 
 a Bill which was to put power in the hands of a criminal 
 and immoral race. The Times aptly called this, paying 
 " black mail to the enemies of Parliamentary Government." 
 
 Yet Mr. Gladstone, who in the autumn session had taken 
 advantage of the organized obstruction to enlarge the 
 scope of the Redistribution Bill ; Mr. Gladstone, who had 
 before encouraged obstruction, and then taken advantage 
 of it to pass great sweeping " Rules of Procedure," which 
 robbed the House of all liberty of speech, and dealt a 
 death-blow to its very existence ; that Mr. Gladstone, on 
 November 4, 1884, drew a second advantage from the 
 obstruction of that autumn, and, at the Liberal Club, en- 
 deavoured to stir the mind of the country to make a 
 second onslaught on Representative Government. He 
 advocated "a great and drastic change in the form of the 
 " procedure of the House ; " and this in addition to his 
 drastic rules of the previous years. That great and drastic 
 change he affirmed to be " not less pressing, and not less 
 " important than any constitutional question that was ever 
 " brought before the people of this country ; " and that 
 " reform within " he desired, on account of " the astounding 
 " condition of the rules of our procedure." Where are all 
 these changes in the House of Commons to bring us ? 
 asked every one of his neighbour. 
 
 The debate on the Address was still proceeding, and 
 Mr. Gladstone stated his belief that it would be kept up
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 373 
 
 for many nights more, and, in fine frenzy of eloquence, he 
 ran to pour out his complaints at the National Liberal 
 Club. Yet it was felt, and generally remarked, that Mr. 
 Gladstone had in his hands the power to stop the debate 
 on the Address; and that as he had failed to use that 
 power, it was but fair to surmise that he had desired the 
 debate to be prolonged, in order to furnish him with an 
 excuse for making further " great and drastic changes," to 
 the utter subversion of the House of Commons. It was 
 remarked, also, that the debate had been prolonged by 
 Mr. Gladstone's old instruments, the Irish members ; Mr. 
 Harrington, about the Maamtrasna trials; Mr. Sexton, 
 about something else ; and so on. The Standard openly 
 asked why obstruction had never "shown its teeth until 
 " Mr. Gladstone's first administration ? " and prophesied 
 that Mr. Gladstone's drastic remedies were "quite as likely 
 " to kill the House of Commons, as to cure it." The Daily 
 Telegraph remarked that the old parties had been broken 
 up, and that the names Tory and Liberal were " as fossils 
 " of the Pleistocene." 
 
 On Saturday, December 6, a sitting of the House had 
 been appointed, and it met at 1.25 in the afternoon. There 
 were two awkward Irish questions on the paper ; and the 
 Liberal Whip (Lord R. Grosvenor) at once moved the ad- 
 journment of the House,before the questions had been asked. 
 This was contrary to one of Mr. Gladstone's new rules, 
 which decreed that no adjournment could be made until 
 all the questions on the notice paper had been answered- 
 The Speaker was appealed to ; but he ruled that " under 
 " the exceptional circumstances of the case, the noble Lord 
 "was justified in making the motion." On being asked 
 " what exceptional circumstances could warrant a member 
 " of the Government flying in the face of a distinct order 
 " of the House, made two years ago, on the motion of 
 "the Government itself?" Mr. Speaker answered : "The 
 " exceptional circumstances, which, in my view, justify the 
 " course taken by the noble Lord, are the proposed ad-
 
 374 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " journment of the session, and the announcement that no 
 " Government business would be taken to-day." Mr. Callan 
 appositely asked whether, if the absence of Government 
 business could warrant a departure from the rules, and 
 justify the adjournment of the House, the House existed 
 merely for the convenience of the Government. The 
 Speaker, however, ruled that no member was allowed " to 
 " argue with the Chair." Here was a deliberate attempt, 
 on the part of the Government, to set the rules of the 
 House at defiance. There is no surer way of inducing 
 confusion in proceedings, than to ignore all rules ; a con- 
 fusion such as would justify Mr. Gladstone in suppressing 
 the House altogether. Moreover, it was a high-handed 
 proceeding, which was, in itself, destructive of all liberty 
 in the House. The members were to count as nothing ; 
 the will of the Government as expressed by the most 
 subordinate member, was everything, and supreme. 
 
 On the 24th February, 1885, Mr. Speaker exerted his 
 power of cutting short a member's speech ; for he ordered 
 Mr. Redmond, during his speech, to sit down. When Mr. 
 Justin McCarthy rose to speak, the Speaker rose also, and 
 said that " he considered the subject had been adequately 
 " discussed ; and it was the evident sense of the House 
 " that the time had come for putting the question." (The 
 question was a motion for precedence of the adjourned 
 debate on Egypt and the Soudan.) The Speaker, how- 
 ever, continued : " The question is, that Mr. O'Brien be 
 " suspended from the service of the House." That being 
 disposed of, Mr. Gladstone moved : " That the question be 
 " now put." The Speaker, however, did not take the sense 
 of the House upon this motion, but put, from the chair, 
 " the amendment moved earlier in the debate by Mr. A. 
 " O'Connor." On the Speaker's attention being called to 
 this irregularity, he first said that Mr. Gladstone had put 
 the question : " that the question be now put." It was 
 pointed out that Mr. Gladstone moved it, but that no one 
 could put it except the Speaker. The Speaker then said :
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 375 
 
 " I put the question from the chair, that the question be 
 " now put." This being contradicted, he said : " The 
 " question immediately before the House was the amend- 
 " ment ; and I thought it my duty to put the question that 
 " the question be now put upon the amendment, as well as 
 " upon the main question." If this had any meaning, it 
 denoted that the Speaker had put two questions at once, in 
 the same breath ! Mr. Parnell then spoke from tJie front 
 Opposition bench (as if he were a recognised member of the 
 future Tory Administration), and submitted that " only one 
 " question can be put at a time ; and that we should be 
 " permitted to ascertain the sense of the House, in accord- 
 " ance with the Standing Order, on the first question, which 
 " was : that the question be now put." The Speaker insisted, 
 in reply, that he had put that question in reference to the 
 amendment ; and he decided that he would now put it 
 on the main question. 
 
 After the divisions thereupon, Mr. Parnell openly 
 charged the Opposition with framing sham motions of 
 no confidence in the Government, which were only " sub- 
 " terfuges, and not based on any real desire to upset the 
 "Government." He continued: " If tJie rigJids of private 
 "members are continually interfered with, the time will 
 " assuredly come when they will be done away altogether." 
 That was an eventful sitting. A member, speaking re- 
 spectfully and to the point, was silenced. The cloture was, 
 for the first time, imposed on the debate ; and Mr. O'Brien, 
 for rising to address the House, and saying, "We will 
 " remember this in Ireland," was named, and suspended. 
 
 On the 2/th February, Mr. O'Brien's suspension was 
 brought under the attention of the House, and the Speaker 
 stated that he had named him in virtue of the words, " or 
 " otherwise," in Standing Order 1 1 : " for disregarding a 
 " ruling or abusing the rules of the House, or otherwise, 
 " by persistently and wilfully obstructing the business of 
 " the House." But the desire to invite the House to con- 
 sider the ruling of the Speaker, was summarily squelched.
 
 376 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 The account of the scene, which appeared in the St. 
 James s Gazette, was as follows : " There was (during the 
 " debate) none of the display of impatience, none of the 
 " outcry and interruption, which usually mark the evident 
 " sense of the House, when that sense is in favour of the 
 " immediate closing of a debate. Still, the Speaker, inter- 
 " preting the feeling in most minds, though it had not 
 " found voice, felt called on to declare that it was the 
 " evident sense of the House that the subject had been 
 " adequately discussed." When the Speaker had made the 
 announcement, there was a great " outcry " and " uproar " ; 
 then " Mr. Gladstone sprang to his feet, armed with a little 
 " book, and began rapidly turning over the leaves, to find 
 " the proper rule for enforcing the cloture." Then the 
 Speaker named Mr. O'Brien ; and Mr. Gladstone again 
 began turning over the leaves, to find the proper rule for 
 suspending a member. After considerable " din," " Mr. 
 " Gorst told the Speaker that the way he proposed to put 
 "the question was not regular > and not according to the 
 ''Standing Order; and other members took the same 
 " view." But none of those members were named for 
 " disregarding the authority of the Chair." 
 
 That was not the first time that the Speaker had acted 
 with a disregard of the rules of the House, as if he were a 
 dictator, instead of the servant of the House ; he acted as 
 if he had been put in the chair for his pleasure, instead of 
 having been elected to carry out and safeguard the rules 
 of the House. If it was true that the Irish faction had 
 got up obstruction for their own ends ; if it was they who 
 were enemies of both Conservatives and Liberals, then 
 how important it was to preserve the authority of the rules 
 of the House, and not to show how easily they could be 
 set aside ; more especially so, as Mr. Gladstone and Lord 
 Salisbury, Sir Stafford Northcote and Lord Hartington, 
 had agreed to provisions in the Reform Bill, whereby Mr. 
 Parnell's party would be increased from 23 to nearly 90 
 in the next Parliament.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 377 
 
 In the spring of 1885 (Morning Post, May 19) Mr. Glad- 
 stone began to throw off the mask a little, and evince his 
 designs and his feelings toward the House. These were 
 his words : " Those hon. gentlemen who interrupt me must 
 " either alter their mode of proceeding, or some one will have 
 " to suggest some method in which hereafter the debates of 
 " this House are to be conducted. It is hardly possible for 
 " me to pay proper respect to the House, and to preserve proper 
 " continuity of remark, when I am interrupted in a manner 
 " unparalleled in my recollection." Mr. Gladstone then 
 added that he said this not on his own account, but 
 " because I feel that a severe blow has been struck at the 
 " liberties and dignity of Parliament." Most true, Mr. 
 Gladstone ! But who struck the blow, nay repeated blows, 
 at the liberties and dignity of Parliament ? Yourself, with 
 the assistance of the leaders of the Conservative party. 
 
 No. LV. 
 
 HAVING sufficiently explained the aim of the obstruction, 
 which we have all endured during the past few years, and 
 which the country has looked at with amazement, I must 
 revert to the schemes of the Irish party, in whose behoof 
 the obstruction was carried on. It tended to their benefit 
 and aggrandisement, but to the ruin of the two great 
 English parties, and the destruction of the House of 
 Commons. 
 
 We have often heard it said by Mr. D'Israeli, among 
 others that " the great moral power " which alone stands 
 steadfast against the overwhelming tide of immorality, 
 lawlessness, and injustice ; that the rock which alone stems 
 the flood of Godlessness and Atheism, is the Roman 
 Catholic Church. How comes it then that the Roman 
 Catholic bishops and priests have been the aiders and 
 abettors of Revolutionary Atheism in Ireland ? It was
 
 373 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 they who formed, maintained, and guided the Irish party ; 
 and that party, atheistical and revolutionary itself, has ren- 
 dered Ireland atheistical and revolutionary. A letter from 
 an earnest Roman Catholic gentleman, who is one of the 
 acutest politicians in Ireland, is open before me. He says : 
 " You are right in supposing that there is no sincerity in 
 " regard to Home Rule, nor in regard to any other tenet. 
 " This insincerity and want of all honesty of purpose make 
 " association with the Irish party impossible for any one who 
 " desires to be honest. This has sprung from what I believe 
 " to be a mistaken principle of the Irish priests. . . . 
 "The priests join in all the ' National* cries and agitations, 
 " in order to ' keep the lead ' of the people in their own 
 " hands. They do not seem to remember how St. Paul 
 " withstood St. Peter for acting in a similar manner St. 
 " Paul refusing to give place to him for a single hour." 
 Another Roman Catholic gentleman in Dublin, more con- 
 versant with all the petty intricacies of Irish politics than 
 almost any other man, wrote on October 3, 1879: "All 
 " the blame may well be attributed to the [Conservative] 
 " Government, and their Chancellor of the Exchequer [Sir 
 " Stafford Northcote]. He might have crushed the obstruc- 
 " tionists and covered them with contempt ; instead, by 
 " his weakness, he made heroes of them ; and they returned, 
 " having conquered the British Parliament, as they alleged, 
 "to pose as patriots at home. The priests live by the 
 " people, and want to appear as their champions. Hence 
 " the action they are taking the policy of which, if they 
 " could only see before them, is as questionable as the 
 " morality." Was it then weakness which caused Sir 
 Stafford Northcote to make heroes of the Irish party ? or 
 was it intention, and coincidence with the views of his 
 chief and his master ? 
 
 Here is another letter, dated December 19, 1879 : " From 
 " having belonged to the Irish party, I know some ins 
 "and outs, which are not generally known. This much, 
 " however, I will tell you at present : Butt played a double
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 37g 
 
 'game ; he was brought to the top to aid the Fenians the 
 
 strings of which agitation he held in his hand, from ha'vin^ 
 
 een counsel for them. Then, as I know, he agreed to 
 
 ^ play into the hands of the (Mr. D'Israeli's) Government 
 
 The priests went with the National cries, so as 
 
 keep the lead of the people ; and the Fenians pushed 
 
 on the National cries until they ought to have got too 
 
 far for the priests." Thus, then, it came that your great 
 
 " moral power," your steadfast rock " of the modern world 
 
 has promoted revolution and atheism in Ireland And 
 
 thus it is that the Romanist bishops and priests have been 
 
 the aiders and abettors of immoral, dishonest, and socialistic 
 
 principles. 
 
 The proud English Constitution the envy of foreign 
 lands, the boast for ages of the Anglo-Saxon race, and 
 the model of the Constitution of the United States that 
 English Constitution has been repeatedly suspended in 
 Ireland, because of the absolute necessity of clapping 
 :tters on the rebellious Irish. Would England wantonly 
 tarnish the glory of her British Constitution and her laws ? 
 t the fault of Great Britain that she has been forced 
 to take measures so odious, measures so averse to all the 
 instincts of her people ? She rules colonies in all parts of 
 the globe ; and men of every race now glory in being her 
 subjects. Against them she has never suspended the'con- 
 titution, which is the birthright of her people. Even 
 savage tribes have not drawn her into such a course. Only 
 Ireland, which enjoys the greatest proximity to her shores, 
 fosters feelings most distant and adverse to England. Only 
 Ireland, which has been favoured with a more beneficent 
 legislation than England, has nurtured such hostility and 
 animosity to England, as to compel England frequently 
 to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland. Great 
 Britain has been the pioneer of civilization in the whole 
 world ; yet Ireland has never been civilized, and has to 
 be treated as less civilized than the Fiji Islanders and the 
 Canadian Indians. What have the Romanist bishops,
 
 38o RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 assembled in Maynooth, declared as their philosophy of 
 the Irish question ? " Depart from our coasts," they have 
 cried to England ; " it is our intention to expatriate the 
 " English Protestant landlords, and hand over all their land 
 " to the Roman Catholic Irish peasantry." They have 
 added the threat that, if this be not done by law, the 
 gyves and fetters, which we place on Irish assassins, will 
 only serve to increase the rage of the Irish people. The 
 Fiji Islanders hold that it is necessary for the civilization 
 of their island that the civilizing European should be 
 turned out ! And what means have the Romish bishops 
 and priests employed to effect their purpose ? An alliance 
 with the Fenians if, indeed, the Fenian Society is not 
 merely an offshoot or tendril of the Jesuit Society the 
 Fenian Society, on which a simulated condemnation was 
 passed in Rome! At the Synod of Maynooth, in 1875, 
 under Cardinal Cullen, and at the secret meeting of 
 September 7, they determined that the simulated con- 
 demnation should be relegated to small print, and an 
 appendix ; while the Synodical letters, addressed to the 
 people of Ireland, should treat the Fenians " cum magna 
 " caritate et benignitate" So testify " The Acts and 
 " Decrees of the Synod," printed in Dublin by Browne and 
 Nolan, in 1877. 
 
 Can it be said that Great Britain fails in goodwill towards 
 Ireland alone of all her colonies ? Call to mind the vast 
 sums which have been sent to Ireland, from time to time, 
 as alms from England, in the time of her want. Look at 
 the ever-recurring efforts at " remedial legislation ; " at the 
 schools paid by the State ; at the Roman Colleges and 
 universities, which Protestant England has helped to found 
 and endow ; consider the destruction of the wealthy Pro- 
 testant Church, to please the poor ignorant Irish, who 
 called it " alien \ " watch all the nursing and dandling of 
 that Celtic spoiled child of Cimmerian, Turanian, Hamitic 
 blood, whenever it shrieks and whines, and whimpers that 
 it is wretched.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 381 
 
 The Irish complain of the Crimes Act, which put a stop 
 to their Cardings and Moonlight murders ; and yet in 
 England, where we have not earned such an Act by crime, 
 there is " Palmer's Act," which is nearly as potent. The 
 Irish exult in their Land Acts of 1870 and 1881, and the 
 Arrears Act of 1882, by which English landlords in Ireland 
 have been robbed and nearly ruined. They have their 
 Court of Land Commissioners, to reduce the rents due to 
 the landlords, and so drive the latter out of the country, in 
 a way Tyrconnel did not succeed in doing. They have 
 their compensation for disturbance and for improvements ; 
 which is another means of ruining their landlords. Such 
 things the English have not. The English have still to be 
 honest and pay their debts. The Irish have been rocked, 
 and dandled and petted by Gladstone and Co., because 
 of their Roman Catholic Church. Witness the care and 
 trouble exhibited by English Ministers in bringing about 
 such a state of things in Ireland ! Since 1814 there have 
 been repeated Royal Commissions to inquire, and Parlia- 
 mentary debates to criticise. At one time it was the land ; 
 at another time, public works ; and every bog, except the 
 Serbonian bog of Irish discontent, was drained. Then the 
 Romanist institutions of Ireland were subsidized and 
 nursed ; and it was thought that, to free her religion and to 
 strike down her rival, would lay the axe at the root of the 
 evil ; for Irish discontent had already been traced to her 
 religion. But the freer her Hierarchy, and the more 
 powerful her priests, the more discontent there has been, 
 and the fiercer the agitation in Ireland has burned, in spite 
 of the physically ameliorated condition of her people. 
 
 The Jesuit Reviewer, Father Cathrein, S. J. (Stimmen 
 aus Maria Laach, April 21, 1881), argued : "How little the 
 "continual alleviations for the Catholics of Ireland pro- 
 " ceeded from good will, is proved, as by example, from the 
 "great agitation which was carried on from the year 1820, 
 " till it culminated in the Roman Catholic Emancipation 
 "Act of 1829. It is proved also, to take another example,
 
 382 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " by the prolonged campaigns which were necessary in 
 " order to accomplish at last, the fall of the Irish Church 
 " in 1869. Even yet, the political equality of Ireland with 
 " England has not been fully worked out. But in the midst 
 " of the inequalities, stands, thank God, the Act of Union of 
 "i 80 r, -which destroyed the Legislative Independence of 
 " Ireland, and which has given rise to an agitation which will 
 " not die out until the Irish Parliament has been restored" 
 What argument is this ? The " remedial measures " of 
 England, he says, are proved not to have proceeded from 
 goodwill, because they were wrung from England by suc- 
 cessful agitations ! Who made those agitations, which 
 proved victorious over England's will? Who placed 
 England on tenter-hooks, and kept her there, writhing 
 in her agonies and inquisition tortures, ever since 1820? 
 There she is doomed still to writhe, it appears, until the 
 complete autonomy of Ireland, and her separation from 
 England has been granted ! And that Jesuit thanked God 
 that an Act of Union still existed, which Jesuit astuteness 
 could transform into a basis for further agitation ! 
 
 The plan of the Jesuits, which Tyrconnel attempted to 
 carry out for them, must be borne in mind, and compared 
 with the plan which Devoy, the Fenian, 1 has likewise 
 attempted to carry out. We must remember, too, that it 
 was the Jesuits who invented Home Rule. It was they 
 who first formed the Irish party, and placed it under Mr. 
 Butt. When it was discovered that Butt was playing a 
 double game, he was hunted out by them, and died of a 
 broken heart, and the party was given for a short time to 
 Mr. Shaw, the Chairman of the Munster Bank. Mr. Shaw 
 was afraid to go the lengths required of him, and so he 
 was ousted in favour of Mr. Parnell. To Mr. Parnell was 
 entrusted the realization of the following plan which was 
 published for the instruction of the Irish people on Decem- 
 ber u, 1878. The name of John Devoy, the Fenian, was 
 attached to the document. 
 
 1 Convicted of Fenianism in 1865.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 383 
 
 No. LVI. 
 
 THE Jesuit plan was explained in a long letter from 
 New York to the Freeman's Journal, dated December n, 
 1878. It is a document of very remarkable ability and 
 of the highest importance. To this document, the name 
 of John Devoy was attached. The plan was to organize 
 all Ireland exactly on the model of a Fenian Brotherhood. 
 It was to be divided into a number of circles, which were 
 to be governed by higher circles, and those again by higher 
 circles, and so on, up to the supreme Vigilance Committee 
 which was to rule the whole. Each circle was to be kept 
 in utter ignorance of all the members, except one, of the 
 circle immediately above it ; and all the members were to 
 yield implicit obedience, tanquam ac cadaver, to their 
 superiors. I now give some extracts from the letter : 
 " It is the abstention of the Nationalists, as a body, from 
 " the public life of Ireland, which gives trading politicans 
 " a chance of using a large number of them locally for 
 " personal ends. It is simply ridiculous to say that, indi- 
 " vidually, the majority of the Nationalists do not take part 
 " in elections of all kinds. But they do not enter the poli- 
 " tical arena as an organization with a programme and policy 
 " of their own. . . . The result is that the advanced 
 " Nationalist party exerts less influence over the current 
 " of public events in Ireland, less influence in determining 
 " the opinion of the world, as to Ireland's wants and 
 " wishes, than its numbers would entitle it to, if it took its 
 " proper share in public life, and was organized for public 
 " action. ... It has been long felt by many that the 
 " policy of abstention from public life is a policy of efface- 
 " ment a policy which multiplies the difficulties in the 
 " way of Irish independence, and gives enormous advantages 
 " to the friends of English rule. . . . 
 
 " The object aimed at by the advanced Nationalist party, 
 " the recovery of Ireland's national independence, and the
 
 384 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " severance of all political connection with England, is one 
 " that would require the utmost efforts, and the greatest 
 " sacrifices, on the part of the whole Irish people. . . . 
 " I am convinced that the whole Irish people can be 
 " enlisted in an effort to free their national land, and that 
 " they have within themselves the power to overcome all 
 " obstacles in their way. I feel satisfied that Ireland could 
 " maintain her existence as an independent nation, become 
 " a respectable Power in Europe, provide comfortably for a 
 " large population within her borders, and rival England in 
 " commerce and manufacturing. I contend she can never 
 " attain the development to which her geographical posi- 
 " tion, her natural resources, and the moral and intellectual 
 " gifts of her people entitle her, without becoming complete 
 " mistress of her own destinies, and severing the connection 
 '' with England. . . . Ireland desires independence, 
 " simply because it is her right, and because she can best 
 c< manage her own affairs ; not on account of any of the many 
 "grievances she endures at the hands of England. . . . 
 " I yield to no man living in the lengths I am prepared to 
 " go to get rid of foreign domination in Ireland. . . . 
 
 "While I admit that Nationalists now vote at these 
 "elections, I deny that they act as a body, or with any 
 " settled plan or purpose. With the majority of these local 
 " or municipal bodies in our possession, even without the 
 " Parliamentary representation, we should be in a position 
 " to do many things we can only dream of now. With the 
 " municipal bodies, and men of spirit and determination 
 " as Parliamentary representatives, backed by the country 
 " and by millions of the Irish race scattered over the 
 "world, there would be no necessity to go to London 
 " either to beg or to obstruct. . . . No party, or com- 
 " bination of parties in Ireland can ever hope to win the 
 " support of the majority of the people, except it honestly 
 " proposes a Radical reform of the land system. No 
 " matter what may be said of individual landlords, the 
 " whole system was founded on robbery and fraud. . . .
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. # 
 
 " The system was forced upon us bv England 
 
 "r b rvv resent Iandiords %Jit 
 
 the robber horde sent over by Elizabeth and James the 
 Ftra, by Cromwell and William of Orange, to garrison 
 he country for England. /, is t}le mte et /~ 
 ( that the land sttould be owned by those wJu> & * 
 Listen to the muttenngs of the coming storm IN ENGLAND 
 uid ask yourselves what is g oin g to become of the land 
 
 <<manT y ' ^ * ^ "^ ^ f -mmercial and 
 manufacturing depression,-^ depression sure to continue 
 because the causes of it are on the increase. What' 
 
 '<dal\h aSk '7 Uld beC me f thC In ' sh ]and ' Iords > ^spe- 
 cially the rack-renting, evicting ones, in case of a social 
 us l0n m E land , Jt is a quest . on w {. ch ^ 
 
 themselves must decide, within the next few years. WiJh 
 >m> or without them, the question will be settled before 
 >ng; and many who now think the foregoing assertions 
 
 a 
 
 The Education question is only ap proache d at present 
 
 >m a purely religious standpoint There is no reason 
 
 ' it should not be treated also from a utilitarian 
 
 ^ point of view, not to speak of a National one. The 
 
 curse of Ireland for several centuries past, after foreign 
 
 * ~ - 
 
 TARIANISM- (,.,., sects outside the Roman Catholic 
 
 h). . . . Why not insist on the history of 
 eland being taught in all our schools? and on the 
 Jtatwnahzation (Romanizing) of the schools where Protes- 
 ts are trained? It cannot be expected that men 
 amed up in anti-Irish ideas will make good Irishmen ; 
 M nor can ,/ be expected that any large number of Protestants 
 wtlljom any political party which devotes its principal 
 Torts to a p ure iy (Roman} CaMic ^^ R ^ fear ^ 
 
 e (Roman) Catholic majority, more than love of En-. 
 id, which makes anti-Irish Irishmen of so many of our 
 stant fellow-countrymen; and if they are ever to 
 
 c c
 
 386 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " be won over to the national side, some sacrifice must be 
 "made. ... If Ireland were free now, one of the first 
 " things, after the Land question, which would demand 
 "solution, would be that of County Government ; and the 
 " principle should be laid down in the National programme. 
 " The whole people have an interest in the local, as well 
 " as the national, administration, and should have the 
 " selection of a county Council or Board, having much 
 " the same powers as the Council General of a French 
 " department. [How did John Devoy obtain a knowledge 
 of the Conseils Ghie"raux\n. France?] 
 
 " While the right to the franchise of every man born on 
 " Irish soil, who has not forfeited his rights of citizenship 
 " by conviction of crime against society, should be affirmed, 
 " the very least that should be demanded at present is 
 " the equalization of the Irish franchise with that of Eng- 
 " land. ... A programme such as I have roughly 
 " sketched above, would seriously embarrass the diplomacy 
 " of England abroad ; and, if carried out with firmness, 
 " resolution, and judgment, it would make Ireland count 
 " for something in the world, even before she won self- 
 " Government." 
 
 On February 10, 1879, the "Ulster Home Government 
 " Association " held its annual meeting in Belfast, and the 
 following resolution was passed (I omit the preamble) : 
 " It is the conviction of this meeting that an Irish Parlia- 
 " ment is the only authority the people can look up to, 
 " seeing it alone can beget public spirit and a sound public 
 " opinion." Mr. Parnell supported this resolution, and 
 announced his intention to obstruct to such a degree that 
 " the Government should be impressed with the necessity 
 " of dealing with the Irish question." On the 3rd of 
 March, 1879, Mr. Biggar, M.P., speaking in Bermondsey, 
 said : " By the Irish race, I mean to include all Irishmen 
 " of the Roman Catholic faith, wherever they are to be 
 " found : Protestants, I do not consider to be Irishmen at all, 
 " They are merely West Britons, who have, by accident,
 
 ratic-^ ally itself with th- 
 "I urge all my countrymen T v g * Demo<: y. 
 "I do not care wWchTnd to **t " """ **"**** 
 "Physical force as possible V ? mUCh dis P Ia y of 
 
 "but when you rem^rnbt J U "^ be ft "' "umbers ; 
 
 " at owed 
 
 "ultimate success." 
 
 ' y Cannot doubt of your 
 
 n n 
 
 and cries 
 "tion; "Thee 
 
 
 were frequent 
 ReTO '"- 
 
 "like tit f f " r u y U Ut f y ur homes . if 
 Pouit of the bayonet; for a spirit v^ill
 
 388 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " spring up in Ireland which will be the destruction of the 
 " landlords for ever. We dare them to do it. Organize, 
 " therefore ; organize yourselves. What have not organi- 
 " zations done for Ireland ? The organization to which we 
 " have the honour to belong I mean the Fenian organiza- 
 " tion that organization disestablished the Protestant Irish 
 " Church. Mr. Gladstone himself has admitted that it did." 
 
 Two days after the utterance of those felonious speeches, 
 on June 17, 1879, the "Irish Convention Act" was re- 
 pealed, with the concurrence of Mr. D'Israeli's (Lord 
 Beaconsfield's) Government ! The Irish Nation, in a state 
 of jubilation, wrote in its leader : " Its repeal will remove 
 " some cumbrous and disabling fetters, which hung around 
 " the limbs of the Irish people, and will afford facilities for 
 " organized expression of Irish opinion to an extent un- 
 " known since the Revolution of 1793." The Roman 
 Catholic ex-Chancellor of Mr. Gladstone's Government 
 (Lord O'Hagan) concurred in the repeal, saying, in the 
 House of Lords : " Parliament no longer fears assumption 
 " of its powers or usurpation of its functions ; and against 
 " any possible assault upon the common law, the law of the 
 "land gives ample security." The ample security of the 
 law of the land, against an assault on a part of the common 
 law, was soon found to be very insufficient. And then it 
 was perceived that the " Irish Convention Act " was re- 
 pealed, in order to enable the conspiracy to march. 
 
 On July 13, 1879, a meeting, attended by Messrs. Davitt, 
 Dillon, and Londen, was held at Claremorris. The chair- 
 man of the meeting was the Rev. Canon Ulick Bourke, 
 parish priest. Mr. Londen, in his speech, said that " the 
 " Irish people are not without allies ; for we have the 
 " English Democracy at our back." Mr. Davitt said, " We 
 "have been called Communists and Fenians, because we 
 " asked for the right to live in Ireland. We may retaliate, 
 " and ask what right the landlords have to the soil ? " etc. 
 
 On the 26th the memorable Ennis election took place. 
 It was a contest between Mr. Parnell, whose nominee was 

 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. ^ 
 
 Mr. Finnegan ; and Mr. William O'Brien who h a H 
 
 W " 
 
 S /n" 13 ' S Sy5tem ' Which wil1 be held to by the 
 landlords l,ke grim Death. Organize! Unite! S Tp s 
 " foundahons by intelligent and persevering operatl " 
 On August ,6 Mr. Davitt openly P formed tte nal 
 Land League " at Castlebar. The principles of it were 
 
 "to p r r ? , ch , arte ;, : " The Iand f ^ S 
 
 e people of Ireland," and so forth 
 
 ^l Ck ', n Sun f>;' A ^ us t 3i,Mr.Parnell called 
 lords the drones of the hive," and said : "It was the 
 duty of the Irish tenant farmers to combine and a^k fo 
 
 "a reducer ""' '' *"* * ** * n reduction ' wh -e 
 a reduct on was necessary, then (he said) it was the duty 
 
 the tenant to pay no rent until he obtained the 
 reduchon; and if they combined in that way, f they 
 
 r duct o g 1h er 'l nd '* b f g refUSGd a J USt and -be 
 -tion, they kept a firm grip of their homesteads, no 
 
 "t P hou e s r ad n "f? C Ul ^ PreVafI agafnSt the l-<^eds of 
 
 aousands of tenant farmers of the country." On the 
 
 same Sunday, Mr. O'Connor Power, M.P., spoTe at Bally! 
 
 haun is , m the West. He said: "The time for fixity of 
 
 hi T ^^ ^ ThG land ^ Uestion must be ^ttled 
 
 by the compulsory sale of all lands, and the distribution 
 
 Of i among the occupiers." On September 7, Mr 
 
 C Connor further said, at Castlebar, that he was in favou^ 
 
 Bering the landlords some compensation, and letting 
 
 ^em depart in peace. He desired to disestablish the
 
 39 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 landlords, just as the Protestant Irish Church had been 
 disestablished. Two days before, on September 5, Mr. 
 Biggar, M.P. for Cavan, said, at Draperstovvn, Co. London- 
 derry : " If the landlords should refuse the reasonable and 
 "fair concession now offered, they may have to suffer a 
 "great deal, because ultimately a BLOODY REVOLUTION 
 " will take place in these kingdoms ; and the land will be 
 " taken from the landlords entirely, as it was in France in 
 " 1792." 
 
 No. LVII. 
 
 ON September 12, there was a meeting at Tipperary, 
 attended by Messrs. O'Clery, P. J. Smyth, and Parnell, 
 members of Parliament The latter said : " It is no use 
 " looking to Parliament if you go on paying rents which 
 "the land is not capable of yielding. If any of you, who 
 " may have saved some capital during good times, go on 
 " paying those rents, why, you cannot expect and you 
 " will not get the landlords to lower them ; and you will 
 " not get your farms. You will remain the serfs and helots 
 " that you are. Therefore it is for you to stand together, 
 " to be determined, to insist upon a reasonable reduction 
 " where a reasonable reduction is necessary ; and where 
 " you do not get a reasonable reduction, then I say that it 
 " is your duty to pay no rent at all. Now this may seem 
 " very extreme talk ; but I tell you that it is common 
 " sense ; because, if you have only got half or three-fourths 
 " of the rent to pay to your landlord, and he refuses you a 
 " reduction, what is the use of your paying him that half or 
 " three-fourths ? " 
 
 The end of September saw this teaching put in practice 
 by the attempted assassination of Mr. George Sydney 
 Smith, the Marquis of Sligo's agent. On Sunday, October 5, 
 the land agitators made vigorous attempts to arouse the 
 people of Cork, Queen's County, Mayo, and Sligo. At 
 Cork Mr. Parnell advised the tenants to offer a passive
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 391 
 
 resistance, by merely refusing to pay their rents. At 
 Maryborough, in the Queen's County, Mr. Biggar attended 
 with Mr. Dillon. The latter said : " His advice was to 
 " abstain from outrages, because outrages were not necessary, 
 . . . The fight will begin after the November days. 
 " What would the landlords do when they refused them 
 " the rents of November ? Let those who have the money 
 " pay the rent ; and let those who have too high rents, ask 
 " the landlord to reduce them by fifty or sixty per cent., 
 " and if he refused, pay no rent. He will then serve the 
 " tenant with notice ; and they must have the meetings 
 " every Sunday ; and if the last resource were adopted, 
 " they must put a ban on his land. If any man tJien takes 
 " up that land, let no man speak to him, nor have any business 
 " transactions with him" Mr. O'Connor Power, on the 
 same day, held a meeting of more than 25,000 men at 
 Ballinrobe, with Mr. Davitt's assistance. In the County 
 Westmeath, a manifesto was at the same time circulated, 
 which contained the following words : " The only cure for 
 "the universal depression of trade in 1879: land must 
 " come down to its proper value about 2s. 6d. or 5-y. per 
 " acre. The farmers of Great Britain and Ireland must 
 " have land that will enable them to compete with the 
 " freeholder of America. . . . The land belongs to the 
 " people ; the Crown, as representative of the people, and 
 " guardian of their rights and privileges, being head land- 
 " lord. An Act of Parliament may authorize a public 
 " company to buy, and compel owners to sell, land for 
 " public interests. An Act of Parliament may authorize 
 " the Crown to buy, and compel the so-called landlords of 
 " the soil to sell the land, at a fair price to the Crown, when 
 " as at present the necessities of the Empire require that 
 " exorbitant rents and capricious owners should be got rid 
 " of by purchase ; and they will be easily purchased soon. 
 "... Disendow and disestablish the landlords, as the 
 " Protestant Church was disendowed and disestablished in 
 " Ireland. Away with land monopoly ! If you want tenant
 
 392 
 
 " right, if you want leave to live on the land of your birth, 
 "send no landlords to Parliament as well send wolves to 
 "guard sheep," etc. 
 
 On Sunday, October 12, Mr. Parnell held a meeting 
 at Navan, County Meath, which was attended by 30,000 
 persons. He said : " The only course for the tenant 
 " farmers of Ireland is this : now that they are in posses- 
 " sion of their farms, to see that they remain in possession 
 " of them. Go to your landlord, and if he disagrees with 
 " your estimate of what a fair rent should be, ask him to 
 " appoint one man, and say that you will appoint another, 
 " and they will settle it between them. If he refuses this 
 " arrangement, offer him what you consider you can fairly 
 " be called on to pay in these times, and ask hi m for a 
 " clear receipt. If he refuses to give you a clear receipt, 
 " put the money in your pockets, and hold it until he 
 " conies to his senses. If the tenants on each property 
 " join together and do this, the cause of the tenant farmer 
 " in Ireland is won. No landlord can prevail against you." 
 Mr. O'Connor Power went further, and exclaimed, "Abolish 
 " landlordism, and make the tiller of the soil the owner of 
 " the soil he tills. That is the only effectual way of coping 
 " with foreign competition. Introduce the American land 
 "system into England and Ireland." On the same Sunday, 
 meetings were also held in Newport, County Tipperary ; 
 in Tubbercurry, County Sligo ; and at Annaghdown, 
 County Galvvay. 
 
 At the latter place, Mr. Davitt made a remarkably 
 violent speech, saying, " The only relief the sole reliance 
 " is, therefore, in yourselves. Realizing this to its full 
 " extent, at last the democracy of Ireland has resolved 
 "upon sustaining the supreme right of resistance con- 
 ferred upon the people by their Creator. Apart from 
 "the present distress, the growing mind of the Irish people 
 " cannot brook a land system which retards, instead of 
 " advancing, their civilization and social progress ; and an 
 " onslaught upon such land laws is the national instinctive
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 393 
 
 " act of a resurgent nation. On the rent question, as on 
 " that of the land, your greatest dependence must be on 
 " yourselves. Never mind the companies of Zulu-whipped 
 " soldiers that are now being sent over here, in answer to 
 " your cry for the means of sustenance. Don't imagine you 
 " will be throivn out to die like dogs, as your kindred were in 
 " '48. Stand firmly and self-reliantly against the brood of 
 " cormorant vampires that have sucked the life-blood out 
 " of the country ; that have banished our brothers and 
 " sisters ; and that have made our people a nation of 
 " paupers ; and ere long we will have no legalised plunder- 
 " ing system in Ireland to sustain the most profligate 
 "horde of unmitigated land thieves that ever cursed a 
 " people and robbed them of the profits of their industry. 
 " They may threaten you with eviction if you refuse to pay 
 " rack-rents imposed upon your holdings ; but don't forget 
 " that an English Cabinet Minister once declared tJiat eviction, 
 " under certain aggravated circumstances, was a felony. You 
 " know it is a maxim of English law that a felony can be 
 " resisted to tlie death. . . . Depend upon it, then, that 
 " you are not to die by hunger, as your kindred did in '48. 
 " Do not despair, but be up and doing. Organize your- 
 " selves into clubs and protection associations ; labour un- 
 " ceasingly for your own and your country's advancement ; 
 " and you will yet have the proud privilege of beholding 
 " the people of Ireland the owners of its fruitful soil, and the 
 " rulers of its own fair and yet unconquered land" 
 
 Mr. Parnell then held a meeting in Belfast. On the 
 1 6th, he said, at a meeting in Newry, that the farmers 
 could settle the land question for themselves, without the 
 assistance of Parliament, if tJiey ^vould obstinately refuse to 
 pay any rents ; while their members of Parliament could 
 coerce Parliament by obstructing all the business of tJie 
 House, until a satisfactory Land Bill had been carried into 
 law. On Sunday, the iQth, Michael Davitt held a meeting 
 at Newport, County Mayo, and referred to "the reptile 
 " press," and to the " lazy, good-for-nothing, idle, sensual,
 
 394 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "and voluptuous" landlords. On October 21 the Land 
 League was inaugurated in Dublin, and many more meet- 
 ings of a similar character were held in various parts of the 
 country before the close of October. 
 
 On November 2, Mr. Parnell, at Galway, explained 
 that the general strike against paying rents, and the ban 
 against the occupation of farms from which the tenants 
 had been evicted, were but means to an end ; and that end 
 was the compulsory transference from the landlords of all the 
 land in Ireland. By means of terrorism, they could ex- 
 clude all purchasers, and so reduce the price of land to 
 almost nothing. The " Surplus Fund " of the Irish Pro- 
 testant Church was then to be used in order to buy the 
 land for a mere song, and put it in the hands of the tenants. 
 We have seen that, in 1882, this formed part of Mr. Glad- 
 stone's proposals. In moving a vote of thanks to the 
 chairman, Mr. Parnell stated that, to the Fenian, Michael 
 Davitt, "was due the initiation of this movement for a 
 " reduction of rents, and the ownership of the soil by the 
 " occupiers." 
 
 At Gurteen, Messrs. Davitt, Daly, and Killen attended 
 a meeting. Mr. Davitt said: "The papers credited Mr. 
 " Lowther with an original discovery that the tenant 
 "farmers of Ireland had 30,000,000 in Irish Savings 
 " Banks to their credit ; and that that money formed a 
 "good security to landlords to obtain their rents during 
 " the winter. . . . If it is true, I deny that you should 
 " draw upon that, in this year of impending famine and 
 "dire misfortune before us, in order to satisfy the greed 
 " and avarice of the landlords. If you have it there, I say, 
 "look first to the necessities of your children, of your 
 " wives, and of your homes ; look to the wants and neces- 
 " sities of the coming winter ; and when you have satisfied 
 "those wants and necessities, if you have a charitable dis- 
 " position to meet the wants of the landlord, give him what 
 " you can spare ; and give him no more. I am one of 
 "those peculiarly constituted Irishmen who believe that
 
 
 attL^s as our a r rs , knew " 
 
 pee; 'I relink ; bam ' er ' hat StandS betwee th ^ 
 Ireland and their just rights." 
 
 3av,tt, it must be remembered, was a ticket-of-leave 
 into pnson again. So far from dote so 
 
 a , 
 
 , as a reward. The Government were there- 
 directly responsible for his utterances and the resuTs 
 
 S 
 
 ' bruta1 ' ^ e ^y, crafty 
 ' 
 
 nd kwle ' rua ' ^ e y, crafty 
 
 1 lawless population of Ireland. The whole country was'
 
 396 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 ablaze with the agitation. Landlords tried to sell their 
 estates in the Landed Estates Court ; but there were no 
 buyers. All property was enormously depreciated. 
 
 The next step was to light the flames of agitation 
 among the populace of the great towns of England and 
 Scotland. Messrs. Parnell, Finnegan, Mitchell Henry, and 
 O'Connor Power started for Manchester ; whence Mr. Par- 
 nell went to Bolton, Mr. Finnegan to Leeds, Mr. A. M. 
 Sullivan to Newcastle-on-Tyne, and both Mr. Sullivan and 
 Mr. O'Connor Power carried the inflammatory torch about 
 London. 
 
 On November 19, Michael Davitt, Daly, and Killen 
 were arrested for their seditious speeches at Gurteen. A 
 meeting was at once called, and held at the Rotunda in 
 Dublin, on November 22. Mr. Parnell said : " Fellow- 
 Countrymen, I beg you to remember there are to-night 
 "countrymen of yours suffering in prison, because they 
 "attempted to show their fellow-countrymen the road to 
 "freedom. Remember the voice of Michael Davitt is 
 " speaking to you from his prison. Hold up your hands 
 " with me and vow you will not cease that you will not 
 "cease from this struggle until the teachings of Michael 
 " Davitt, for which he has been persecuted this day, shall 
 " have been carried out and fulfilled to the very last letter'' 
 
 The next day, November 23, at Bala, Co. Mayo, Mr. 
 Brennan attended a meeting and said : " Whatever may be 
 "the words Mr. Davitt used at the Gurteen meeting, I 
 " adopt them here to-day ; and if I knew them, I would 
 "repeat them for you, believing in my soul that they are 
 "the words of justice and truth. It will not become us 
 " here to make long-winded orations to-day. The time for 
 "mere speech-making is gone by, and the hour of the 
 " resolve and the act has arrived. The speech of to-day is 
 "the indignation which I see flashing from your eyes, and 
 "the determination which rests on your brow. . . . 
 "Think of the scenes of '47; think of the blazing roof; 
 "think of the workhouse and the emigrant ship; think of
 
 starvation, death and coffinless graves; and then tell 
 7 y U ! trUG t0 the t f ur 
 
 "Prison S h r 
 
 ' 4 7? Coff K, ne f n r tl0n W1 " tneSS tWO such s <*nes as 
 God forbid. I call upon every one of you who can 
 to-day, to do everything in your power to pr ven t it 
 Orgamze for the protection of your own rights; combine 
 that you may offer an unbroken front to the common 
 my. . . . As for you, friends, your course is clear- 
 keep before your minds the great fact that the land of 
 Ireland belongs to the people of Ireland. Follow the teach 
 ^y/ tke apostles of our creed, who are now its martyrs 
 and lt s confessors. We tell you here to-day, what ha 
 'been told you from every platform in your country"! pay 
 (( no rent until you get a reasonable reduction. We tell you 
 
 
 
 v^,^,n,, man tias been evicted ' 
 
 should such a mean wretch be found in Mayo as to 
 snatch such a farm, go, mark him well! cast him out of 
 theso Cl ety of men as an unclean thing. Let no one be ready 
 buy orsellwtth him; and watch how the modern Iscariot 
 will prosper. 
 
 The agitation in England, also, was being energetically 
 earned on. Messrs. O'Connor Power and McCarthy spoke 
 m Hyde Park, Mr. Parnell in Liverpool, and Michael 
 Davitt m Newcastle and Glasgow. On December 5 Mr 
 snnan was arrested; and on the succeeding Sunday two 
 great demonstrations were made in Castlebar and at French 
 Hill. Mr Parnell said, in Liverpool, that the tenants, by 
 ding he rents, would keep four millions of money in 
 ir pockets ; he continued : "There are men in this land 
 movement who consider that the free rights of Ireland 
 must be won by tlu bloody battlefield, and by the sword. But 
 these men do not take part in this movement for the 
 purpose of carrying out those ideas; they take part in 
 he p to win peaceably the solution of the land 
 question. 
 
 His meaning was this: John Devoy, in October, 1878 
 Ireland, against the parole which he had given
 
 393 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 when liberated by Mr. D'Israeli. There he founded the 
 " Invincibles," and agreed with Parnell (as the latter publicly 
 confessed) that the Irish Party should extirpate Land- 
 lordism and restore the Irish Parliament ; while Devoy, on 
 his part, agreed to furnish all the money and Fenians, from 
 the United States, which might be necessary. If Parnell 
 should fail to accomplish these two ends, then he and his 
 party were either to join the Fenians, or to stand aside 
 and let the Fenians do the work by physical force. l 
 
 No. LVIII. 
 
 ON December 21, 1879, Messrs. Parnell and John Dillon 
 sailed for the United States. There was, in Great Britain, 
 no doubt as to the aim of the agitators. It was that which 
 Tyrconnel had tried to compass in the reign of James II. 
 namely, to drive out, to worry out, or to buy out the 
 landlords, in order to make a Roman Catholic State of 
 Ireland. The crusade was to be carried on in the United 
 States also, in order to rouse the thousands of Irish in that 
 country, and to extract from their pockets the dollars 
 which were needed for the agitation in Ireland. At Pitts- 
 burg, in Pennsylvania, Mr. Parnell spoke, and said : " Six 
 " hundred thousand Irish tenants are beginning to find 
 " out that they are more powerful than ten thousand land- 
 " lords ; and when we have claimed the land for the people of 
 "Ireland, we shall have laid the foundation-stone for our 
 " country to take her place among the nations of the earth." 
 Again, on February 16, 1880 : " Up to this time the land- 
 " lords and Government have failed to give assistance ; but 
 " the fiendish work of eviction is still pursued ; but from 
 " the blood of the brave Connemara women, who resisted 
 " the home destroyers, shall spring up a power which will 
 " sweep away, not only the land system, but the infamous 
 " Government that maintains it." At Cincinnati, on Feb- 
 ruary 23, he said : " I feel confident we shall kill the land- 
 1 " Parnellism," by an Irish Nationalist, I.A.F., Dublin, 1885.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 . r v, u j 
 
 fromthenameofl h ' a J ,rlh a ^ ^^ eXC ' Uded ' 
 
 So said a new pervert, fresh from the teachir 
 
 t
 
 400 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 tion of Ireland was carried away by it. " Peace and good- 
 " will towards men ! " That was thrust aside. Even calm 
 reason was lost sight of in the dust of agitation ; and the 
 small still voice was unheard in the din and clamour of 
 conflicting factions. At last " the time drew near the birth 
 " of Christ," and the Vatican seemed to hear the bells from 
 hill to hill from Vatican to Quirinal tolling " Peace and 
 " goodwill, goodwill and peace to all mankind." For we 
 learned from the Fanfulla, that the Vatican had sent a 
 circular to the Roman Catholic bishops in Ireland, " con- 
 " demnatory of the Irish agitation," and " expressing the 
 " desire of the Pope that they should interpose between the 
 " Irish people and the Government, in order that all strife 
 " between them might be averted." The circular did not, 
 in stern language, command the bishops to assert the law 
 of God, and preach the Gospel of Christ. It merely re- 
 quested them to " interpose themselves " between the people 
 and the Government. Further, it requested the bishops 
 " to use their best endeavours to pacify the minds of the 
 " people, by assuring them that the English Government 
 " is disposed to examine, as promptly as possible, the 
 " various questions which have given rise to the present 
 "agitation." Dr. McCabe, the R. C. Archbishop of Dublin 
 and Primate of Ireland, did actually write a Pastoral in 
 the right sense ; and drew upon himself the sneers and 
 objurgations of his brother bishops. His offence was con- 
 tained in these words : " We must take care not to render 
 " these trials intolerable, driving God from our side, by the 
 " violation of His eternal law. Unfortunately men, pro- 
 Claiming their sympathy for the people in their deep 
 "distress, are going through the country disseminating 
 " doctrines, which, pushed to their logical conclusion, will 
 " strike at the root of that good faith and mutual confi- 
 " dence which are the foundations of social life. These 
 " doctrines have already produced their evil results. . . . 
 " Very Rev. Fathers ! while standing forward to support 
 " our flocks in this their dark hour of distress, we must not
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 the preposterous Irish claims 2 While th* p 
 
 Bi,ho, .r 
 
 Clayton, Clumber Street, Nottingham " 
 
 Go^Tir ''", I u eland is " Ot frora the vlritatibn of 
 God, but through the cruelty of man. It is an artificial 
 famme, not a natural one. In the year ,836 a ele c 
 Par hamentary Committee reported that Ireland could 
 easfly sustain much more than its actual population - 
 export .mmensely besides ; nevertheless, tha? anyl'i.ure 
 of the potato crop would bring a famine. . 
 
 there was a famine. There was another in 8 
 
 uarersofwh 
 <c q ^heat were carried off [i.e. sold] to England 
 
 836 we have seen how Parliament was warned by its 
 Comrmtteethat the Irish were at all times in dan4 
 Of starvation, while they were producing enough to main 
 
 n ' Ce 
 
 onthh t - -re no 
 
 the brink of starvation. They went over the brink 
 
 and penshed by hundreds of thousands in the famine 
 .eh ensued. That horrible famine lasted from the 
 
 winter of ,845 to the spring of ,8 5 I-nve terrible years 
 , Dec. 3, ,879. . Pan MM Ctmtll , March 9, ,880. 
 
 D D
 
 402 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " . . . It is incredible, but it is true, that those five years 
 " were years of splendid harvests and exceptional pros- 
 " perity. In the year 1843 three million quarters of grain 
 " and one million head of live stock had been exported to 
 "England. In 1844, fifteen million pounds worth of pro- 
 " duce went there. In 1845, tne harvest was specially 
 " good, and seventeen millions worth of wheat alone was 
 "exported for English consumption. So it was in 1846. 
 "In 1847, the abundance was so great, that the Govern- 
 " ment Commissioners reckoned the total value of Irish 
 " produce at ^45,000,000. ... It appears then that 
 " Irish famines are made by English laws and Irish land- 
 " lords. The union of England with Ireland, so far, has been 
 " too much like the union of the spider and the fly. The poor 
 " fly struggles ; but its vitals are sucked dry in spite of all that 
 " it can do. In 1844, the great Devon Commission recom- 
 " mended, as a remedy against the famine, the consolida- 
 tion of farms, and the exportation of about one million 
 "of the inhabitants. Cruel and hypocritical rubbish ! The 
 " land has always produced enough for twice its people ; 
 " but, many or few, the tenantry will never be let to get 
 "any of the produce but potatoes. . . . 
 
 " And how have the English dealt with the struggles of 
 " their victims ? We will not speak of the horrors of the 
 " suppression of the great rebellion, into which they goaded 
 " the unhappy Irish peasantry. Since the Union they have 
 "given them a surfeit of Coercion Acts under different names, 
 " in 1800, 1801, '4, '7, '8,' 9, 1810, '15, '16, '17, 1822, '23, 
 "'24, '25, 1833, '34, '35, '36, '37, '38, '39. 1840, '41, '46, '47, 
 " and many years since, they have by those Coercion Acts 
 "taken away the liberties of Irishmen, transporting people 
 " who did not stay at home at night, or who could not prove 
 " they knew of no arms in their houses. . . . Since 
 " the Emancipation, they have conceded to the oppressed 
 " Catholic peasantry some political and social rights ; but 
 " these rights are more nominal than real, as the ingenious 
 " system of exclusion makes them almost nugatory. There
 
 that that cruelty exist 
 
 "homes and Hberties of th ei tenant t "^ f "* 
 ."that if a tenant dare to receilTa gues t^ven hf^" 3 
 
 * rf ,,,* to the foolish, infatuated Romanists ! Yet 
 
 * course, the open and avowed guidance of the anarcMcal' 
 
 movement was confided to the hands of n,en w ho profes ed
 
 404 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Protestantism, so as to blunt the keen edge of suspicion, 
 and enable the Catholic dignitaries, who secretly fomented 
 the agitation, to appear as the disinterested friends and 
 advisers of the Government. Those dignitaries called 
 themselves " the rock which stemmed the tide of immor- 
 " ality and lawlessness." They were really the accomplices 
 of the lawless tenant-Leaguers and of the anathematised 
 Fenians. Mere friends and advisers of the British Govern- 
 ment, they pretended to be. Connected with the State 
 they were not, in any sense, since the Irish Church Act 
 of 1869 was passed. For while that Act disestablished 
 the Protestant Church, it also terminated, for a good round 
 sum of money, the annual subsidy to the Roman Catholic 
 Church, which used to be voted by Parliament, and so 
 kept that Church in check. The Roman Catholic Church 
 then became a purely voluntary body, and has ever since 
 had to depend entirely upon the people. She now depends 
 upon the people. She is the people's slave, not the people's 
 master and teacher. The priests may pretend to lead the 
 people ; they really re-echo the stridulent vox populi. 
 "The difficulty of the Church is," say they, "that all 
 " the younger priests are Nationalists and Revolutionists." 
 Is your Church, then, professedly no longer the teacher of 
 eternal truth, as you have always pretended ? Is it merely 
 the organ of the " younger priests " ? " That is all very 
 " well in theory," they reply ; " but we cannot live unless 
 " we get our dues." So a tax-gatherer may say ; but the 
 Church should remember the word, " Ye cannot serve God 
 " and Mammon." It appears that you serve Mammon. 
 
 Moreover, you do not give your cloak to him who, you 
 say, sues for your coat. You do not turn your other cheek 
 to be smitten, if you publish those firebrand pastorals 
 against the British Government, and pose as the accom- 
 plices, fautors, and fomenters of anarchy and agrarian 
 plunder. In this, indeed, you have some futile excuse to 
 advance : " Mr. Gladstone himself showed the example." 
 True ; you encourage the outrages, and you mean that he
 
 
 c y0 u r po a y , e *- 
 
 the a dv Ja,e ff& **>*&",% "' 
 
 No. LIX 
 
 that the Wsh 
 because it W as 
 
 SU PP osition 
 
 
 absence of crime and outrage,
 
 406 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " with a general sense of comfort and satisfaction, such as 
 " has been unknown in the previous history of the country. 
 " I do not hesitate to say, especially as very many able 
 " men co-operated with me in passing that law (the Land 
 " Act of 1870), as it would not have been in my power to 
 " have framed such a measure without assistance, that that 
 " Land Act has been one of the best specimens of prudent, 
 " and, at the same time, benevolent and popular legislation 
 " in our time, while I believe it will contribute greatly to 
 "the benefit of the Irish landlord, not less than to the 
 "benefit of the Irish tenant." Thus did Mr. Gladstone 
 state the grounds on which he would have it supposed 
 that he refused to renew the Coercion Act. The Coercion 
 Act, therefore, lapsed soon after he had come into office ; 
 and thus that serious impediment in the way of the future 
 Land Agitation was dexterously removed. Mr. Gladstone 
 then introduced an intricate invention, the " Compensation 
 " for Disturbance Bill," which was of so outrageous a 
 character, that the House of Lords would have incurred 
 great culpability if it had consented to let it pass. Its 
 rejection, which was easily predicted from the character 
 of the Bill, was a great incentive and aid to the land 
 agitation of the succeeding autumn. Mr. Parnell attacked 
 the House of Lords, and laid all the responsibility for the 
 land agitation on the Peers, for their rejection of the Bill. 
 He thus enlisted the Radical party "the democracy of 
 " England " in his support. The Government followed 
 the same tactics, in the same direction. Mr. Forster re- 
 peated Mr. Parnell's charge, both in Parliament and also 
 at Bradford ; although, as Irish Secretary, he must have 
 known that the real aim of the National party was to 
 separate Ireland from England ; and that the land agita- 
 tion was not the effect of real grievances, but merely a 
 means or stepping-stone to that end. Thus both Parnell 
 and Mr. Gladstone's Government were acting on precisely 
 the same lines ; and the only real opponents were some 
 independent members on the Conservative side of the
 
 House. Yet Mr. Gladstone, on April 4, l8 8 2 , had the 
 effrontery to say: "I do not make it a matter of severe 
 censure that the late Government did not foresee the 
 magnitude to which the Land League would grow, nor 
 extent to which it would take hold of the minds of 
 e people f Ireland, over a circle infinitely wider than 
 been touched by any movement within the last fifty 
 What effrontery ! Had he not done all he could 
 make the way of agitation easy? Had he not put 
 weapons ,n the hands, or rather arguments in the mouths 
 the Parnells, and Davitts, and Dillons, and Biggars? 
 he not favoured the Mannings, and the Vaughans 
 the Bagshawes-Roman Catholic prelates of anti- 
 Jtian doctrines and carried out the very policy which 
 esuits had two centuries before put into the hands of 
 Tyrconnel ? While the Romanist bishops had not a word 
 say against the agitations and the repeated exhortations 
 o violate the law, and the reiterated incentives to robbery 
 by non-payment of rent, and the cattle-houghings and 
 pmen-cardings, and midnight murders, the Protestant 
 hop of Down denounced such unchristian thoughts like 
 a Christian teacher. The Roman Episcopate had been 
 t and approving, while the Biggars, and Davitts, and 
 
 USC f 
 
 , 
 
 T^f USC f the free SC P e for their Preachings, 
 which Mr. Gladstone had so dexterously afforded them 
 
 Look back a dozen years, and you will see that the 
 erment had to be created in Ireland up to the year 
 09. You may remember that Ireland was brought to 
 same point of anarchy at home, and menace for 
 England, before Mr. Gladstone felt himself able to pass 
 : Act for Disestablishing the Protestant Church of 
 and. And yet he benignly said he did "not censure 
 those who did not foresee the magnitude to which the 
 " Land League would grow ! " 
 
 In 1880 Parliament was suddenly dissolved no one 
 knew why. Both the Liberal and the Conservative 
 "whips" and wire-pullers, as we have said, expected that
 
 408 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Lord Beaconsfield would have had "a bare working 
 " majority of twenty-five." It would have been easy, in 
 such a case, to have passed any measure for Ireland. The 
 Jesuit organ, the Civilta Cattolica, of April 3, 1880, wrote : 
 " Every one, high and low, felt that the result of the forth- 
 " coming elections in England has been involved in the 
 " greatest doubt and obscurity, and no one can count with 
 " certainty on a Ministerial majority ; yet it is thoiight 
 "probable that either Ministers may obtain a very small 
 " working majority ', or else that the Liberals will gain a 
 " narrow majority, so that they both will be left in utter 
 " dependence on the Irish vote." The expected narrowness 
 of the majority on either side would have given colour to 
 the necessity of conciliating the Romanists of Ireland. 
 But it was ordained otherwise. There were losses to the 
 Conservatives in rapid succession ; and the constituencies, 
 taking fright lest the Home Rulers should hold the balance 
 of power in their own hands, went in with a rush for the 
 Liberal party. Lord Hartington or, as it proved even- 
 tually to be, Mr. Gladstone was brought into power. 
 There was then no excuse to be found. No inconvenient 
 pressure by the Irish party could be alleged. 
 
 The same end had, therefore, to be arrived at by great 
 skilfulness of tactics. The " Relief of Distress Bill " was 
 introduced as a measure of urgency. One clause of this 
 Bill was then separated from the rest, and became the 
 " Compensation for Disturbance Bill." That Bill consisted, 
 at first, of a single clause, like a single link of the root 
 of the weed called Cutch-grass ; and like that, it grew and 
 multiplied, and spread into a noxious and widely extend- 
 ing plant. Notice was given of amendments, intended to 
 transform the Bill. The most important of all, was that 
 of which Mr. Gladstone himself gave notice, on the night 
 of the 1 2th of July. It was to be discussed at a morning 
 sitting on the I3th of July. In giving this notice, he with- 
 drew an amendment, of which the Attorney-General for 
 Ireland had already given notice, when Mr. Gladstone had
 
 _ 
 would, by a sjp-e exeensit ofTe'" uTs^ S cu : t r h Cnt 
 
 1 were contradicted, and veered round all the rt, 
 = poLhcal compass. These unexpected vicissitudes 
 KM* Mr "fr" th ? H USe f CO "- but as" 
 
 danger created in Ireland ; and he warned the county tha 
 commun,st,c doctrines are contagious," and that attacks 
 tTL'd r ' ShtS f Pr Perty d " Ot C " fi - Pelvis to 
 
 The Bill was very properly thrown out by the Lords 
 
 oT" 8 ha , d theref re ' be -^e for continuing the 
 du inethe'" rder t0 / 0rCe the m - surc O" P^'iament 
 ensu.ng sess.on. The Aurora, the organ of the
 
 410 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Vatican, published an article at the beginning of November, 
 1880, in favour of the Land League. " In consequence of 
 " the insupportable state of things in which the peasants of 
 " Ireland have been placed by the landlords, it has bec'ome 
 " necessary that the people should endeavour to shake off 
 " the oppression to which they have been subjected. They 
 " are determined no longer to starve to death, upon land 
 "watered with the sweat of their brows." The Roman 
 Catholic Archbishop of Cashel also wrote from Rome at 
 the same time (Nov. 8) : " My dear Mr. Gray, the Irish 
 " bishops now in Rome have just seen, by the Freeman, of 
 " Wednesday, that it is proposed to form a Defence Fund, 
 "in view of the State prosecution (of the Land Leaguers). 
 " The bishops desire to subscribe to that fund, and do so 
 " accordingly, earnestly recommending it at the same time 
 " to their respective flocks." The news was also flashed 
 along the telegraph wires from Rome, that the Irish bishops 
 in Rome had " declared boldly to the Pope that they can- 
 " not do otherwise than support the action of the agitators 
 " against the British Government." The Aurora, moreover, 
 continued to print a series of articles on Ireland, which 
 might well vie with, or even surpass, the most violent and 
 unscrupulous of the Irish Nationalist newspapers. 
 
 This course had, it was said, been taken by the Pope's 
 newspaper, and by the Irish bishops, " pending decided in- 
 " structions from the Holy See." At length the bishops 
 waited on his Holiness, to take leave of him, and the 
 " decided instructions " were vouchsafed to them. Accord- 
 ing to the Aurora, the Pope was most grateful to the 
 British Government; and then the Aurora said: "The 
 " Irish bishops can never preach revolt, crime, or incite- 
 " ments to acts of violence. They will not do so. His 
 " Holiness did not need to use any great efforts to keep 
 " them in the path of duty ; although, indeed, he may have 
 "already adjured them to separate themselves openly from 
 " those who spread terror, by brandishing the sword in the 
 " faces of their fellow-citizens. We trust that the
 
 
 " the sster countries 
 
 tttl- 0{ the 
 
 a question of 
 
 pendence of Ire and M r'?u g the absolut ^'nde- 
 
 ; and tl w 
 
 - :
 
 412 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. LX. 
 
 THE Continental Liberals saw plainly enough that the 
 agitation in Ireland was all to the behoof of the Roman 
 Church ; but who, they asked, were the backers of the 
 agitation engendered by the Jesuits, and carried out by 
 Parnell and Co. ? who had the same end in view ? A letter 
 signed " TRUTH " appeared in the Standard} which 
 answered the question. It asserted that : " The whole 
 " country is armed to the teeth ; the very poorest has his 
 " rifle or revolver, and shots may be heard every day in 
 " all directions. It is said by those who ought to know, 
 " that these outrages that are taking place around us, 
 " are fostered by the Government in order to enable them to 
 "pass their coming Land Bill" 
 
 The Marquis of Salisbury a short time before 2 had 
 asserted, in a speech at Hackney, while commenting on the 
 state of Ireland, that the Government regarded the agitation 
 as the indispensable leverage for moving the Land Bill for- 
 ward. These were his words : " The mere fact that it has 
 "been so elaborate, the mere fact that, in order to enable 
 " a single man to get in his turnips and cut his corn, it has 
 " been necessary to send down seven thousand soldiers and 
 " police, is sufficient security to the criminals of the rest of 
 " Ireland that no similar interference with their proceed- 
 ings will take place. The truth is, there is something 
 " of superstition in the language which has been held with 
 " respect to the application of the ordinary law. The 
 "ordinary law is an application of the system of judge and 
 "jury to the detection and punishment of crime ; but it 
 " presupposes that juries are free to convict, and that the 
 "witnesses are free to give evidence. If the freedom 
 " ceases, if there is such a reign of terror that no jury 
 " would dare to convict, and witnesses would not dare 
 " to speak the truth, the whole power and efficacy of the 
 1 Dec. 14, 1880. - Nov. 20, 1880.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 4 , 3 
 
 "ordinary law may disappear. It is like a watch c 7f 
 wh 
 
 . e a wat 
 
 which the mainspring has been taken. It is not wom 
 it is mere imbecility to think that you can use andlt'e 
 valuable results from the working of a machine whole 
 tive power has been taken away. Perfect freedom to 
 give verdicts, and to give evidence, are essentials of the 
 ^ English criminal law ; and the moment that that freedom 
 
 "useless Vt' n aWay '- itS Pr CedUre beC meS P erfectj y 
 ss. Nothing remains except a mass of anarchy 
 
 The whole social system is reduced to anarchy, on the 
 >p of which is a cumbersome hypocrisy which calls 
 itself the ordinary law ; but its only effect, if it has any 
 t at all, is to restrain and hinder those who would 
 defend themselves. It has no efficacy whatever in re- 
 straining and hindering those by whom these outrages 
 ^ are perpetrated and planned. But these considerations are 
 o plain that I do not for a moment flatter myself with 
 .eir having occurred to me, and not having occurred to 
 the very able and distinguished men forming Her Majesty's 
 government I must conclude, therefore, that, unconsci- 
 ously to themselves, some other consideration must have 
 prevented them, or rather, I should fairly say, prevented 
 some of them-prevented the Birmingham members of 
 Government jfrorn appreciating their full force, and 
 enlisted them, as they are now enlisted, on the side of outran 
 and disorder. What is that consideration ? If you think 
 < for a moment, you will see that crime, outrage, and anarchy, 
 ^ though very disagreeable to those who live in the midst of it 
 is of a Parliamentary nature. A Land Bill, especially if 
 *t contains confiscating and revolutionary clauses, would fall 
 very flat if there were no disturbances in Ireland. If 
 " disturbance continues, the more it continues and the fiercer 
 " it becomes, tJie more cause there will be, or will seem to be 
 "for exceptional legislation, next session, with respect to 
 "Ireland. And if there be any members of the Govern- 
 " ment, and I suspect there are, who have some pet project 
 "some darling theory to promote, they will work, uncon-
 
 4U RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "sciously to themselves, for that state of things which will 
 " furnish arguments by which their theories shall be 
 " established. On the other hand, if landlords are delivered 
 " over for the winter to the tender mercies of the Land League, 
 " it may be supposed that they will be in a more malleable and 
 "pliable temper next spring, and will render their places more 
 " readily to the shearers who desire to shear them. In other 
 " words, the present state of Ireland, and the anarchy which 
 " has taken place, are so many arguments for future legisla- 
 " tion. Every person who is shot, tarred, and feathered, or 
 " exposed naked on the roadside, contributes, in his degree, to 
 " bring revolutionary proposals, as to the land of Ireland, 
 " ' witJiin the range of practical politics*, since he will be as 
 " great a benefactor, after his kind, as Clerkenwell, no doubt, 
 " was in Mr. Gladstones mind. It would be a thousand 
 " pities, in the mind of those who aim at legislation of this 
 " kind next year, to arrest that state of things which at 
 " once furnishes motive power for Parliamentary action." 
 
 The noble Marquis ably described the labours of the 
 political woodman while he was hewing at the third branch 
 the land of the "Upas-tree of Protestant ascendency." 
 The murdered victims, the houghed cattle, the burned 
 hayricks, were but the chips which flew from his axe. 
 What cared he for the chips ? But the noble Marquis little 
 thought that in 1885 he too would decide to trust to "the 
 " ordinary law," and let crimes multiply. " Is thy servant 
 " a dog, that he should do this thing ? " 
 
 Lord Salisbury returned to the charge on the 3<Dth of 
 May, 1 88 1. He said : "After all the terrible prophecies 
 " that have been made with respect to Ireland ; after the 
 " length of time that has been spent by this country in min- 
 " istering to its sorrows ; after all the sacrifices that have 
 " been made ; after you have torn up an ancient institution 
 "by the roots; after you have done all these things, you 
 " find that now the disaffection of a large portion of the people 
 " of Ireland is greater than it has been since 1798. To what 
 " are tJiese things due ? That is a question you have to ask ;
 
 "Bill, than to restore 
 "weakened the 
 
 * ld tem Py Land 
 " Ce 
 
 . 
 
 case to be that T^io,^ -ngiana. I believe the 
 
 " equitable and ever ^ butft The ' be .^^ wi th an 
 
 spasm of coercion and 
 
 warning. I heard the &H fn e anger without 
 
 * 
 
 " mn 
 
 to 
 
 "" n ' U whiclt ""? fl "- M <* THEY 
 
 DO THIS, DEPEND UPON IT, FROM SHBM
 
 416 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " IMBECILITY. All their opponents, who have watched 
 " them, know that the Government is composed of remark- 
 " ably clever men. THEY DID IT FOR A PURPOSE for a 
 " purpose to which they reluctantly yielded, but from which 
 " THEY DO NOT DARE TO DEPART. As one of them has 
 "expressed it, they did it because they had to convince 
 " their party." 
 
 Thus did Lord Salisbury, who himself, in 1885, when 
 he "came into office," did "not dare" to depart from the 
 orders of the secret power, explain the resolute inaction of 
 the Government during the autumn and winter. He might 
 have summed it up in one word : connivance, or complicity. 
 Many a time and oft before, the mere announcement of a 
 firm determination to repress lawlessness with a strong 
 arm, had caused the lawlessness to cease at once. Mr. 
 Gladstone's Government proclaimed their resolute inten- 
 tion not to repress it ; and, as contrariorum contraria est 
 ratio, the agitation and lawlessness at once increased. 
 The Land League ousted the Queen from her authority, 
 and established its own sovereignty over Ireland. It held 
 its own law courts. It published its own decrees. As it 
 was in the time of James II., so it was in 1880. Two 
 hundred years ago Tyrconnel established throughout Ire- 
 land " another law instead of the law of the land ; " and 
 the Land League of 1880 established in Ireland its anti- 
 justiciaries, its anti-nomial decrees, and its anti-coactive 
 powers. An "anti-revolution" has been accomplished. 
 The Government called it a revolt of a population against 
 "oppression and injustice!" And "they must first," for- 
 sooth, remedy the " evils which gave rise to the revolt ! " 
 That is, they must bring in a Land Bill which shall dis- 
 establish the Protestant landlords, and reward the dis- 
 honest greed of the Irish agitators, and of the Irish farmers 
 who supported the agitation. Thus was immunity pro- 
 mised for crime ; and the conscientious Government 
 publicly testified that the revolters were justified in their 
 nefarious deeds justified by hardships unproved, which
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 417 
 
 statesmen and Papists untruly asserted that they had 
 suffered. Shootings, burnings, maimings, robberies, card- 
 ings, boycottings, may be unpleasant, it is true ; but yet 
 they are perfectly just, if the perpetrator can persuade 
 himself that he has been wronged. That is the new 
 morality nay, rather, the morality as old as the Jesuit 
 writers ; and doubtless it was in accordance with its 
 principles that Mr. Gladstone rewarded the Manchester 
 murders, and Clerkenwell explosions, by disestablishing 
 " an alien Church," and paying down a large sum of ready 
 money to Maynooth. He openly ascribed the boon to the 
 outrageous and audacious commission of crime, and so he 
 encouraged its further commission. Thus he justified the 
 means by which he extorted his "remedial legislation" 
 from the country and Parliament " It is not the deeds 
 " which terrify me," said Epictetus, " but the doctrines and 
 " theories by which these deeds are justified." It is not so 
 much the crimes and anarchy of Ireland that we exclaim 
 against, as the vast system of Jesuitical casuistry which 
 excuses them. We are shocked at the Minister who en- 
 courages their commission by exclaiming that, by crimes 
 and disaster, his remedial measures are " brought within 
 " the range of practical politics." 
 
 The letter of an Irish gentleman, who was most con- 
 versant with Irish politics, dated Dec. 22, 1880, says : "A 
 "little boldness and determination in the beginning would 
 " have rendered it (repression) entirely unnecessary. This 
 " may appear very presumptuous criticism ; but I felt, from 
 "the beginning, the danger of permitting the Land League, 
 "composed of penniless adventurers, to travel through the 
 " country advising tenants not to pay rents. The appeal 
 " came directly to every man, and in such a way as was 
 " certain to secure his support. It put money in his pocket, 
 " if it succeeded. Every kind of political teaching was a 
 "joke in comparison to it. Those men who are always 
 "ready to commit the most appalling crimes for a few 
 " acres of land, were sure to seize the idea that gave them 
 
 E E
 
 418 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " land for nothing. The Government looked on quietly, and 
 " GAVE A SANCTION TO THESE TEACHINGS BY REMOVING 
 " THE POLICE, in pursuance of an agreement with Parnell. 
 " What wonder that law has come to be disregarded, and 
 "that a general paralysis has seized on the authorities, 
 " from Mr. Forster down to the common policeman ! Now 
 "the ownership of land, and the honest discharge of any 
 " duty in reference to it, mark out for outrage and perse- 
 "cution. The straits that some poor people, who derive 
 " their income from rents, have been driven to for the bare 
 " necessaries of life, surpass belief." 
 
 No. LX1. 
 
 ACCORDING to the ancient law of the land, the mem- 
 bers of the Land League were traitors. They openly 
 proclaimed that their aim was to depose the Queen, and 
 establish an independent Republic. They looked for help 
 to a foreign Power the United States of America. They 
 formed an organization all over Ireland, to compass their 
 ends; an organization which usurped the executive au- 
 thority and the judicial power of the Queen, and, to a 
 certain extent, the legislative action of the three estates 
 of the realm. The landlords were doomed to be dispos- 
 sessed, because they were Protestants, loyal to the Queen, 
 and determined to maintain the connection with England. 
 What, then, did the Government do, at the end of 1880? 
 There was a loud outcry throughout the country that the 
 leading Land Leaguers should be prosecuted ; and the 
 Government instituted a prosecution. That was all. The 
 trial of Parnell ended in acquittal. With the experience 
 that every one had of Irish juries, no one expected any 
 other result to a trial in Ireland. Parnell was then able to 
 say that a jury had declared his conduct to have been 
 innocent, and no more than the simple exercise of his legal 
 rights. That seemed entirely consonant with Mr. Glad-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 419 
 
 stone's policy. He put legal machinery in motion, and 
 some interested Irishmen declared Parnell innocent. The 
 Government had favoured the agitation, and could not 
 consistently blame their chief instrument in it. They had 
 desired to provide themselves with an excuse for doing 
 nothing, and had secured it. They evidently wished to 
 have their hands forced, by making Parnell a popular 
 martyr; and their hands were forced. They must have 
 calculated on increasing Parnell's influence, by having him 
 tried ; and they increased it. They were sure to encourage 
 Parnell's followers in their desperate course, by Parnell 
 being declared innocent ; and they did not refrain from it. 
 For six months, Mr. Gladstone could always have declared 
 that, to set at nought the authority of the Sovereign, to set 
 up law courts in defiance of the laws of the realm, to issue 
 decrees and mandates in contravention of right, and un- 
 justly to coerce individuals nay, even to levy war on Her 
 Majesty's subjects, was civil war, and that the actors in it 
 should be treated as felons and traitors to their country. 
 He could have said all this ; and he did not say it. On 
 the contrary, he did that which was sure to increase the 
 evil. He therefore connived at the suspension of the 
 Queen's government over the greater part of Ireland; and, 
 as the Times remarked: 1 "The lawlessness which might 
 " have been checked by a few summary arrests in October 
 " or November, has now been organized throughout Mun- 
 "ster and Connaught, and is making its way through 
 "Leinster and Ulster." Ireland had become what Mr. 
 " Gladstone and his favourite colleagues made it, and 
 "meant it to be"* Mr. Gladstone had declared to the 
 Irish, in reference to the explosion at Clerkenvvell, that 
 nothing but fire, dynamite, cataclysm, murder, and mid- 
 night conspiracies, could bring grievances "within the 
 "range of practical politics " ; and then he seems not to have 
 taken care to prevent its being carried out. Mr. Bright had 
 also told the Irish that, as soon as the Liberals should come 
 1 St. James's Gazette, January 6, iSSi. 2 January 3, 1881.
 
 420 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 into power, there would be an end of the abominable Tory 
 system of keeping Irishmen down by policemen and sol- 
 diery. The one said to them : You cannot hope for any 
 remedial legislation without a fitting prelude of agitation, 
 crimes, outrage, lawlessness, and anarchy ; the other pro- 
 mised them that, in taking such a course, they would be 
 saved harmless from all the unpleasant consequences that 
 should follow according to law. The programme was 
 accepted. The bargain was struck. Mr. Gladstone was 
 run into power, and Irish conspiracy at once became 
 flourishing, bold, and rampant. The Vatican or rather 
 the Gesu, the Government, and the Land League had the 
 same end in view, and approved the same means for 
 attaining it. 
 
 On January 10, 1881, the Solicitor General for Ireland, 
 who was soon after made Lord Chancellor, plainly proved 
 that Mr. Gladstone, in his policy, had closely copied that 
 of Tyrconnel. He said: "To try and adjudicate on 
 " questions touching the occupation of land, and enforce 
 ''coercive jurisdiction over the Queen's subjects who are 
 " required, by summons, to attend before them," that, he 
 said, was being practised all over Ireland. He added his 
 comment : " Lawful courts can only be held by authority 
 " of Parliament or the Crown. This, therefore, is a usurpa- 
 " tion of the prerogative ; and, at the lowest, is a high mis- 
 " demeanour at common law, and may be a treasonable 
 "practice as an overt act of intention to depose the Queen 
 "from the exercise of her royal authority in that part of 
 "her dominions." 
 
 Mr. Forster, the Chief Secretary for Ireland, said, on the 
 introduction of "The Protection of Person and Property 
 "Bill" (the Coercion Bill), on Jan. 24, 1881 : "The chief 
 " characteristic of these outrages is intimidation, and the 
 "object is obedience to certain commands especially 
 "commands not to take farms, and not to pay rent, 
 "which have been issued by the Land League. Their 
 " effect is fear and terror, and submissive obedience to
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 421 
 
 " those orders of the Land League to the unwritten law 
 "that has been framed, as the hon. member for the 
 " city of Cork (Parnell) says, by himself and his friends ; 
 "and of which unwritten law the local Land League 
 "committees are the administrators. The hon. member 
 "for Tipperary (Mr. Dillon) said, last Monday, that the 
 " Land League rules supreme ; and yet that the reign of 
 "terror, of which so much has been said, has no exist- 
 " ence in fact. Those were the words of the hon. member 
 "for Tipperary. I think I shall be able to show the 
 " House that the hon. member was perfectly right in the 
 " first part of his statement, but incorrect in the second. 
 " The Land League does reign supreme ; but it reigns 
 "supreme by threats, and fear, and intimidation." Then, 
 turning his attention to the " Courts " held by the Land 
 League, he added : " They are held in connection with the 
 " local Land League. They are presided over by leading 
 "members of the League; they issue summonses in 
 "writing, and sometimes by word of mouth. They hear 
 "complaints, and determine upon them. They require 
 " people to surrender farms ; they impose penalties for the 
 " infringement of the rules of the Land League ; and they 
 "sometimes direct parties, summoned before them, to be 
 " ' boycotted.' Their proceedings are reported in the public 
 " papers." 
 
 On January 26, 1881, the Roman Catholic bishops 
 assembled at Maynooth, and passed resolutions beginning: 
 " We feel constrained by a solemn sense of our obligations, 
 " to declare, once more, that the present state of the Land 
 " Code of Ireland is intrinsically dangerous to the peace 
 "and happiness of our people," etc. They then demanded 
 that the " Land Code shall undergo a searching and 
 " thorough reform " ; and they deprecated " all faltering 
 " legislation on this vital question." They concluded thus : 
 "We cannot refrain from giving expression to the fears 
 " entertained by many, that, should order seem to reign by 
 " t/ie power of coercion, a branch of the Legislature, which is
 
 422 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " regarded as unfavourable to popular rights, may either 
 " totally reject, or substantially nullify any measure of 
 " practical utility submitted to its consideration, the re- 
 " suit of which we cannot contemplate without serious 
 " alarm." As those resolutions were agreed to by Dr. 
 McCabe, Romanist Archbishop of Dublin, we may suppose 
 that the asperities of the original draft had been first 
 softened and toned down very considerably to gain his 
 acquiescence. Yet they did more, even in that mollified 
 form, than hint at an intensification of existing evils, and a 
 prolongation of the bitter agitation. They did more than 
 hint at the possibility of this ; they justified such action 
 beforehand, and so gave it more than encouragement. 
 
 Moreover, the resolutions contained a distinct demo- 
 cratic and revolutionary threat against the House of 
 Lords, which would, they said, be carried into execution, 
 if a Coercion Bill should be passed. Dr. Nulty, Romanist 
 Bishop of Meath, speaking at a dinner at Mullingar, also 
 fanned the flames of agitation : " He had seen 700 persons 
 " turned adrift on the wide world in one day ; or rather in 
 "two, for it took two days to do. He had seen their 
 " houses levelled to the ground and demolished, while not 
 " a single person, but one, inside those houses owed a 
 'farthing rent, and that one went round and encouraged 
 " the others not to pay their rents. But they did pay ; and 
 " he saw the crowbar brigade levelling the houses of honest 
 " men to the ground, houses that sheltered 700 human 
 "beings. He saw them come to one place where there 
 " were, in two houses, fever-stricken victims ; and the crow- 
 " bar brigade refused to take them down. Death was very 
 " busy there, and they were afraid of catching the disease. 
 " But the exterminator told them to do it carefully ; ' for,' 
 " said he, ' I hate the bother of coroner's inquests.' . . . 
 " He remembered one instance where a man came forward 
 " and offered eight years' rent in advance, if he were al- 
 " lowed to remain in his little home ; but it was refused. 
 " The Coercion Bill was really the most atrocious, cruel,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 423 
 
 "and unnecessary measure ever presented. . . . The 
 " Coercion Act was directly levelled at the land agitation ; 
 " but the open agitation of the Land League would be con- 
 Averted into a secret agitation. They ^vo^dd convert those 
 " local branches into secret societies, and the whole country 
 " would be covered with secret societies, with Fenianism and 
 " Ribbonism. The country would become ungovernable, and 
 " the landlords themselves would have to run for their lives" * 
 
 Two days afterwards, the same bishop wrote a solemn 
 Pastoral to the clergy and laity of his diocese, 2 in which he 
 said : " The present land movement exhibits all the 
 "symptoms of a thoroughly effective remedy for the 
 " chronic social malady. Voluntary and peaceful combi- 
 " nation by tenant farmers to attain their just rights, ac- 
 " companied by a stern but discriminating ostracism of 
 "traitors (i.e. boycotting), is the principle on which it is 
 " founded. The arbitrary and oppressive terms extorted 
 " at pleasure, by landlords, from men who were completely 
 " in their power, proved the landlord himself to be an absolute 
 " despot, and the tenant to be nothing better than a helpless, 
 "degraded slave. The efforts, therefore, made to invest 
 " any engagement, entered into by such parties, with the 
 " sacred character of contracts, or to claim for them the 
 " binding force of the holiest covenants known amongst 
 " men, were not only dishonest, but positively profane" 
 
 The Times of the i$th of February, 1881, contained 
 some more resolutions by the Roman Catholic bishops 
 assembled in Maynooth : " The iniquitous and destructive 
 " legislation, which for centuries has been rending Ireland, 
 " has brought the flocks placed under our care to the 
 " greatest want and misery. Famine periodically sweeps 
 " over our fairest districts, which naturally teem with 
 " abundance, and are fertile in the highest degree ; and 
 " frequently our country has been driven to stretch out her 
 " hand for alms, and sue, like a mendicant, for help from 
 
 1 St. James's Gazette, February 10, 1881. 
 8 Ibid., February 12, 1881.
 
 424 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " the other nations of Christendom. These repeated mis- 
 " fortunes must not be impiously attributed to the Father of 
 " mercies, for He has given us a land fertile to a proverb. 
 " They must not be attributed to the sloth or indolence of 
 " our people, for the Irish, in exile, are everywhere models 
 " of unwearied labour and devoted industry. But they 
 " must be attributed to the unjust laws which, at home, 
 " have paralysed the strong man's arm, and, through an 
 " absolute sense of insecurity, have made him apathetic 
 " and hopeless. At present, the Irish nation, rising from 
 "its lethargy in strength and power, demands the repeal 
 " of the cruel laws which oppress her." The Irishman " in 
 " exile " truly is superior to the Irishman at home. Why ? 
 Because in his exile he escapes the nefarious influence of 
 Romish bishops and priests. 
 
 Let us now turn from the Irish bishops to the English 
 Government. The Queen's Speech of January 6, 1881, 
 announced that : " A measure will be submitted to you for 
 " the establishment of a county government in Ireland, 
 " founded upon representative principles, and framed with 
 " the double aim of confirming and of supplying a yet 
 " more serious want, by extending the formation of habits 
 " of local self-government." Mr. Parnell, at Waterford, on 
 December 6, had already made a speech in which he pro- 
 claimed what he and his right honourable colleagues in 
 the Cabinet had already agreed upon : " In a short while, 
 " we hope to replace the present system of county govern- 
 " ment by irresponsible grand juries, with one which will 
 " give full and complete representation to those who shall 
 " pay rates. We shall have, in each Irish county, a little 
 " parliament. . . . Full power shall be given to the 
 " County Boards to control all the affairs of their counties. 
 "... We shall thus have, in each Irish county, an 
 " educating centre a centre which will educate the people 
 " in the duty of self-government, which will train up men 
 " to take a path in that highly national life, which we hope 
 " to partake in, upon the restoration of our own Parlia-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 425 
 
 " went. All this must be done gradually'' Mr. Parnell let 
 out the secret. Mr. Gladstone was working, "gradually," 
 and tentatively, of course, to establish Home Rule in 
 Ireland ; and the agitation and anarchy in Ireland were 
 means to that end. In the debate on the Address, Mr. 
 Gladstone said : "/ contend that it was our duty to have 
 " such a case as would carry a widespread conviction to the 
 " minds of members of this House, and of the people of the 
 " three kingdoms, as to the necessity of the measures which 
 " the Government might feel it their duty to propose? The 
 coincidence between the Queen's Speech and Mr. Parnell's 
 previous oration, betrayed the complicity between Mr. 
 Gladstone and Parnell, which Mr. Gladstone's speech in 
 the debate on the Address merely " accounted for." 
 
 No. LXII. 
 
 TOWARDS the end of the month there was held, at New 
 York, the Annual Meeting of the " Central Organization 
 4< of the Land League in America." The Chairman, in his 
 opening speech, spoke candidly enough. For he said that 
 " it was the aim of the League to help the people of 
 " Ireland to maintain their position, and eventually to estab- 
 " lish Irish Nationality. Matters could not go much 
 " further without Revolution ; but for that the people were 
 " not ready. The land movement was meant, not for Revo- 
 " lution, but to pave the way for Revolution? The aim of 
 the American Land League was, by violence to establish 
 Home Rule in Ireland. This Mr. Gladstone was also 
 aiming at, by gradual and tentative steps. The aim of 
 the land movement, which Mr. Gladstone fostered, was 
 to pave the way for Revolution ! * 
 
 This open explanation, given in America, was fully borne 
 out by the "Letter to the Irish National Land League" 
 which was written by Parnell, from Paris, on February 13, 
 1 Times, January 25, 1881.
 
 426 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 1 88 1. Let us glance at a specimen of his programme: 
 " The near approach of household suffrage in the counties, 
 " a practical certainty before the next General Election, 
 " will sound the doom of the English land system ; while 
 " the starting of a working man's, or agricultural labourer's 
 " candidate in every British constituency, would soon 
 " bring House-of-Commons Radicalism to its senses. A 
 " junction between the English democracy and Ireland's 
 " would give tJie latter the right to make her own laws. The 
 " overthrow of territorialism in both countries, and the 
 " enfranchisement of labour from crushing taxes for the 
 " maintenance of standing armies and navies, would prove 
 " irresistible, would terminate the strife of centuries," etc. 1 
 At the very moment that Parnell was writing that letter, 
 he was the guest of Victor Hugo and Rochefort. Of this 
 fact the Legitimist and Ultramontane Union gave no 
 hint ; but it urged the English Government to " grant to 
 " Ireland the reforms she demanded." The archiepiscopal 
 Monde also studiously ignored the alliance between Parnell 
 and the French Revolutionists ; while the Jesuit Univers 
 barely hinted at the alliance aforesaid. That alliance was 
 the more worthy of remark, because of the programme 
 of the "International Society of working men'' Dupont 
 wrote a letter in 1870, to his Socialist colleagues at Geneva, 
 in which he said : " England is the only country in which 
 " a real socialistic revolution can be made ; and the point 
 " to strike first on, is Ireland. ... In Ireland, the 
 " movement is made a hundred-fold more easy for us 
 " by the two prime facts that the social question is that of 
 " rent, and that the people are more exasperated than the 
 " English. The position of the Internationale, in face of 
 " the Irish question, is very clear. Our first care is to push 
 " the Revolution in England. To this end we must strike 
 " the first blow in Ireland." 
 
 That Mr. Gladstone's policy should be all on the lines 
 here indicated, no longer surprised any one. But it was 
 1 Times, February 17, 1881.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 427 
 
 remarkable that the language of the Irish Roman Catholic 
 prelates should have been that of the apostles of agra- 
 rian revolution. The evils of Ireland were not, by them, 
 ascribed to the judgments of the " Just Judge of all the 
 " world " and the " King of all the earth," without whom 
 not a sparrow falls to the earth, as we might have ex- 
 pected from Christian bishops. This, in fact, they expli- 
 citly denied ! They were not ascribed to the vices, the 
 sloth, the unthrift of the Irish, as we might have awaited 
 from political philosophers ; but, like Rousseau, they 
 ascribed all the evils of men naturally perfect and without 
 original sin, to " an iniquitous and destructive legislation." 
 The Irishman is " apathetic and hopeless " ; but he has 
 been made so by " unjust laws." Irishmen are mendi- 
 cants ; but they have been made so by " unjust laws." 
 The second of God's " four sore judgments," famine, 
 has repeatedly visited Ireland ; but it has always come of 
 " unjust laws." This is the philosophy of Rousseau and 
 the French Revolution of 1789 ; and the Romish bishops 
 built upon it the whole policy of the Land League. 
 
 On such grounds they took, by a legal confiscation forced 
 on the Legislature, the landed property from the present 
 proprietors, and gave it to the tenants, who constituted 
 the flocks of the Roman Catholic clergy. Those tenants 
 were told to withhold their rents and not to pay them. 
 The landlord thereupon asked for his rent, and the tenant 
 was said to have suffered a " grievous wrong," while the 
 landlord was called a " ruthless exterminating tyrant." 
 Every Government of England hitherto was said to have 
 been " tyrannical, oppressive, and cruel " ; while not a word 
 has been said (as any Christian bishop would have said 
 and enlarged upon with pleasure) of the many attempts, 
 year after year, to mitigate the hardships and ameliorate 
 the condition of the impoverished Irish. 
 
 England, in passing the Ballot Act, was undermining 
 her own authority, and rendering certain the separation 
 of Ireland from England. If it be doubted whether the
 
 428 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Jesuits and Fenians have now much power ; if it be held 
 that their intentions are mild and gentle ; then let the 
 speech of the Home Secretary, Sir W. Harcourt, on 
 February 2.2, iSSi, be read with attention. He argued 
 that the Fenian conspiracy " was prepared to carry out its 
 " objects by the most detestable means ; " that they would 
 " assassinate the whole Cabinet," and " attempt the con- 
 " flagration of the whole of London, and the other cities 
 " of England, and would have recourse to all the resources 
 " of modern science." 
 
 It is but fair to add that one of the Roman Catholic 
 bishops of Ireland was not of the same mind as the rest. 
 In the Lenten instructions of Dr. McCabe, the Archbishop 
 of Dublin, we read of Ireland : l " But a calamity more 
 "terrible and humiliating than any that has yet befallen 
 "her, seems to threaten our people to-day. Allies for 
 " our country, in her struggle for justice, are sought from 
 " the ranks of impious infidels, who have plunged their 
 " own unhappy land into misery, and who are sworn to 
 " destroy the foundations of all religions." The Roman 
 Catholic newspaper, the Tablet, ventured to write an article 
 in that sense, called " Ireland and France" Dr. Croke, 
 the Archbishop of Cashel, at once (March 10) uttered 
 his thunders against the Tablet. z He said : " Any public 
 " print or periodical, no matter under what colours it may 
 "sail, that would deliberately express some, at least, of 
 "the sentiments, and strive to give currency to the patent 
 " misrepresentation of historic analogies contained in that 
 " article, is not fit, I think, for admittance into my house. 
 "... The real or fancied coquetting of one or more 
 " Irish agitators with French poets or incendiaries is not 
 " likely to do any serious damage to the cause which he 
 " has so disinterestedly taken to his heart." 
 
 A few days after this 3 Dr. McCabe, the Archbishop of 
 Dublin, published a Pastoral, in which he mildly rebuked 
 
 1 Times, February 23, 1881. 2 Times, March 22, 1881. 
 
 3 Times, March 17.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 429 
 
 Irishwomen for embarking in the Land League agitation ; 
 telling them that they should reserve themselves for the 
 calls of charity, and that they were forgetting the modesty 
 of their sex, and the dignity of womanhood, in coming 
 before the world at the invitation of " leaders who seem 
 " utterly reckless of consequences, and by that recklessness 
 " have brought misery on many families." The Archbishop 
 further bid his clergy to set their faces against a woman 
 "who so far disavows her birthright of modesty as to 
 " parade herself before the public gaze in a character so 
 " unworthy." He said also, that " this attempt at degrad- 
 ing the women of Ireland comes very appropriately from 
 "men who have drawn the country into her terribly de- 
 "plorable condition, . . . men who have sent their agents 
 " to fawn on notorious infidels and revolutionists." Mr. A. 
 M. Sullivan, M.P., with a singular want of modesty, at once 
 took upon him to condemn the exemplary Archbishop for 
 " having done a cruel wrong, in a moment of error, to pure 
 " and devoted Catholic ladies ; " and he put it to his 
 Archbishop " as a matter of conscience " whether he was 
 justified in publicly insulting and wronging some of the 
 most devoted children of the Church ? 
 
 The challenge having been thrown down by a lay in- 
 dividual to his ecclesiastical ruler, the Archbishop of Cashel 
 followed the layman's example by writing, on March 16, 
 a letter to Mr. Sullivan in the Freeman s Journal, attacking 
 his own ecclesiastical superior, namely, the Primate of 
 Ireland (Dr. McCabe), and backing up Mr. Sullivan in 
 " speaking evil of dignities and spiritual rulers." These 
 were his words : " I adopt unreservedly the sentiments 
 " you have so admirably expressed, and am delighted to 
 " find that some one of mark has at last stepped forward 
 " from the ranks of the laity to vindicate the character of the 
 " good Irish ladies who have become Land Leaguers, and to 
 " challenge publicly the monstrous imputations cast on them 
 "by the Archbishop of Dublin. His Grace will not be 
 11 allowed in future, I apprehend, to use his lance so freely
 
 430 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "as he has hitherto done, or to ventilate unquestioned the 
 " peculiar political theories which he is known to hold, in 
 " opposition to the cherished convictions of the great, and in- 
 " deed overwhelming majority of the Irish priests and people. 
 " It is a satisfaction, however, to feel that his Grace's political 
 " likings or dislikings, though possibly of some consequence 
 " elsewhere, carry with them very little weight or signifi- 
 " cance, except with a select few, in Ireland." Thus Mr. 
 Sullivan condemned his spiritual ruler, and a high prelate 
 of the Catholic Church supported the ecclesiastical sedition 
 of Mr. Sullivan, while attacking his own Primate. The 
 misfortune was, however, that " an overwhelming majority 
 " of the Irish priests and people " agreed with the Arch- 
 bishop of Cashel in siding with the revolution against the 
 Pope's representative in Ireland. Probably the Archbishop 
 of Cashel was more of an Irishman, more of a true Celt, 
 more of a Cimmerian or Turanian ; while the Archbishop 
 of Dublin and Primate of Ireland was more of a Christian, 
 more godly, more Christ- like and spiritual. 
 
 On the last day before the adjournment for the Easter 
 holidays, Mr. Gladstone introduced his Land Bill. All the 
 world knows the vague glamour and glorious mirage which 
 he, by his eloquence and Niagara-torrent of words, con- 
 trives to throw about any case he pleases to advocate. So 
 he bewildered the House of Commons by " the finest 
 " speech he ever made," and sent members, spell-bound by 
 his words, to Paris, to the north of Italy, to the excite- 
 ments and splendours of their country houses but not to 
 steady work and calm reflection. He told them that the 
 very first day after the Recess he hoped the House would 
 agree to the second reading of his Bill. The few who re- 
 mained in London said to each other that, although the 
 principles of his Bill were most objectionable, and even 
 communistic, yet for the sake of peace for the sake of 
 securing lasting advantages to the State, for the sake of 
 political or party gains, the Bill might perchance be ac- 
 cepted. A desultory debate was carried on in the news-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 431 
 
 papers ; and it appeared, pretty soon, that peace would be 
 as far off as ever ; dissatisfaction would be increased ; and 
 the State would be at a disadvantage by the acceptance of 
 Mr. Gladstone's injurious principles and delusive doctrines. 
 No one could see in the Bill anything besides that which 
 the Land League and Nationalists desired a step towards 
 the extinction of landlords ; and therefore a step towards 
 the further goal separation from England. So thought 
 the few who had enjoyed no holiday. 
 
 The rest came back with their minds still full of the 
 glamour and mirage, still bound by the magician's potent 
 spell. The first night after the Recess, the second reading 
 of the Bill to revolutionize the tenure of land in Ireland, 
 and to confiscate the property of landlords, was moved 
 in silence. Mr. Gibson, late Law Officer for Ireland, in an 
 able speech, pressed for explanations of many ambiguous 
 points. He resumed his seat. Not a Minister rose to 
 reply. The Government and their supporters loudly called 
 "Divide! divide!" The adjournment of the debate was 
 moved, but the Speaker refused to receive the motion. 
 The adjournment was again moved, in order to press for 
 some Ministerial reply. Then Mr. Gladstone rose, but 
 merely to lecture the Opposition on their unseemly 
 curiosity and obtrusive inquisitiveness ; they ought, he 
 thought, to support without questioning the God-granted 
 Government of Gladstone. Sir William Harcourt rebuked 
 the Opposition for using a " policy of obstruction " ; and 
 it was only after two hours or more of prolonged effort^ 
 that Mr. Forster could be got on his legs ; and then he 
 explained without explaining. 
 
 On the 28th of April, all the Roman Catholic bishops of 
 Ireland met and drew up a declaration on the Land Bill, 
 which, according to the Times, 1 " excited the astonishment 
 "of Roman Catholic lawyers and others interested in 
 " maintaining the rights of property." It was, in fact, an 
 endorsement of the report of the Land League, and a 
 
 1 April 29.
 
 432 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 manifesto of the extremest socialistic views on the rights 
 of tenants. Their demands were formulated. But as they 
 were not likely to be accepted, the whole machinery of 
 agitation had again to be put in motion, with its usual by-play 
 of murders, cutting off agent's ears, midnight outrages, and 
 other Hiberno-Bulgarian atrocities. The demands of the 
 bishops not having met with acceptance, murders had be- 
 come the only alternative. Then Dillon was selected to 
 make the following demand : " The Land League has 
 "taught you that, if you adhere to it like men not like 
 " cowards, turning back at the first menace of danger, and 
 " not quarrelling among yourselves and breaking up your 
 "organization if you adhere to it with courage for two or 
 " three years, it will end in handing over the soil of Ireland 
 " to the people wJio till it" 1 
 
 Of what use, then, is your remedial legislation ? Why 
 should landlords be urged to part with a portion of 
 their rights in order to save the rest ? Your " remedial 
 " legislation " is part of a thimble-rigging process. It 
 is only the first step to the wholesale robbery of land. 
 It is like the persistent advance of the Russians 
 after the armistice, and under pretence of a mere meet- 
 ing to conclude a peace until they had occupied the 
 whole Tchekmedji lines and saw Constantinople at their 
 feet. Lord Hartington had urged that " something more 
 " than justice " should be exacted from the landlords 
 for the sake of peace. Then we saw that the " something 
 " more" meant the whole of the remainder. We were made 
 aware that they cried " Peace ! peace ! when there was no 
 " peace ; " and when they knew that there would be no 
 peace until they had annulled contracts, confiscated pro- 
 perty, and made a travesty of courts of justice. Neither 
 will there ever be peace nor stability in the State, when 
 the foundations of the State shall have been successfully 
 undermined. 
 
 It was much remarked with what tolerance, with what 
 1 St. James's Gazette, May 4, 1881.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 433 
 
 leniency, with what anxious maternal solicitude, the Land 
 League was all along treated by the Government. Many 
 were forced to ask themselves the source of that sympathy, 
 which evidently existed between the Land League and 
 the influential members of the Cabinet ; and the theory 
 was started that the Land League was to "supply the 
 "steam by which the great remedial measure was to be 
 " propelled through Parliament ; and that they were to 
 " enter into co-operation with the Government." Yet every 
 one was perfectly well aware that the Land League was 
 an organization formed for the attainment of an unlawful 
 end, and that by violent and illegal means. The Govern- 
 ment were, therefore, according to those political theorists, 
 no less than conspirators and accomplices in committing 
 High Treason. In 1879, Mr. Parnell had openly stated 
 that the aim of the movement was to effect a compulsory 
 disruption of the Union of Great Britain and Ireland ; and 
 that the agrarian " grievance " had been adroitly seized 
 upon as an instrument calculated to work efficiently on 
 the largest number of Irishmen. Mr. Parnell had avowed 
 that he would never have " taken off his coat for this work" 
 (Land League Agitation) unless he had seen in it the 
 means of bringing about the independence of Ireland. 
 The cry for Home Rule had proved meaningless to many ; 
 distasteful to more. The Nationalists or Fenians had 
 therefore taken up a question, whereby to light the flames 
 of agitation ; a question which would touch every farmer's 
 pocket, and excite every man's cupidity and inordinate 
 greed. The anti-rent agitation was selected as a stepping- 
 stone to the Repeal of the Union, and the establishment 
 of an Irish Republic. 
 
 The Archbishop of Cashel (Croke) placed himself in the 
 forefront of this movement. In the Times of May 9, there 
 appeared a long letter from him in favour of Dillon, the 
 deviser of the Land League agitation. His Grace com- 
 mended Dillon for being an "Irish Nationalist, his (Dillon's) 
 " father before him having had to fly for his life with a 
 
 F F
 
 434 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " felon's price upon his head." He asserted also that " the 
 " Government, in arresting Mr. Dillon, had done a wrong 
 " and spiteful thing." Yet his Grace knew full well that 
 Dillon had contravened the law, by inciting others to break 
 the law, and that the arrest of Dillon had at once given 
 a check to the lawlessness which prevailed in the country. 
 
 At the end of the month, 1 Archbishop Croke returned 
 to the charge. He made a speech at Knockavilly, 
 and said : " In my early days I was connected with 
 " another movement for the regeneration of Ireland (Re- 
 " peal), and as it Jiad failed, I determined to give up 
 " politics for the rest of my life. But when this move- 
 " ment began, I thought I saw something different in it 
 "from any other. It had a backbone that every other 
 " movement wanted. . . .' There is one thing that the 
 "people always understand, namely, what it is to pay too 
 " much rent. The people understand what it is to be 
 " ground down by those who live upon the sweat of the 
 "people's brows. The people understand what it is not 
 " to be well fed, well housed, and well clad. The people 
 " understand what it is to be more miserable than any 
 " other race upon earth. They know well what is the 
 " difference between people starving in this country, and 
 "people enjoying abundance elsewhere. Therefore this 
 "movement is one which they can appreciate, and into 
 " which they can throw their whole heart. A great many 
 " moderate men pooh-poohed the movement in the begin- 
 "ning, and said it could not succeed. Of course every 
 " man ought to be moderate, and I hope I am moderate 
 " myself. But, on looking through history, I find that 
 " moderate men never do much. . . . They never carry 
 " on a great movement to success. There is nothing for the 
 " success of a great movement except daring and enthusiasm. 
 " Therefore I say to myself that this movement must 
 " succeed. . . . It is no longer for the people to stay 
 " in the background. ... I am glad to see you march- 
 1 Tzmes, June I.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 435 
 
 " ing to the strains of martial music. It shows that the old 
 " military spirit of the Irish race has not died out. By 
 "means like these, by priest and people, by men and 
 " women, headed by the bishops and by the general leaders 
 " of the people, there can be no doubt of the result ; you 
 " will achieve a bloodless revolution." 
 
 His Grace's meaning was clear. He had been a Re- 
 pealer ; he had worked for the disruption of the kingdom. 
 But the Repeal movement had failed, and he had deter- 
 mined not to involve himself in another failure. The Land 
 League movement for the disruption of the kingdom, how- 
 ever, promised success, because it had adopted the use of a 
 powerful lever. It fostered and excited every man's cupidity 
 and love of money. It was an appeal to Mammon. He had 
 therefore joined it, and had urged it on, from time to time, 
 in violent language, which spurred on to deeds of violence. 
 The worshipper of Mammon obtained aid from Beelzebub. 
 Yet he called that " moderation " ! He was (he said) " a 
 " moderate man ; " while he freely confessed that moderate 
 men never achieve success ! As he had joined this move- 
 ment because he regarded it as sure to be successful, he 
 thanked Heaven that there were men in it who were not 
 moderate. Words never achieve success ; deeds were 
 wanted, the deeds of daring, enthusiastic, and immoderate 
 men. He was glad, therefore, to see the people marching 
 to the exciting sounds of martial music ; he was glad 
 to see in them the military spirit of the old Irish Revo- 
 lutionists. If they would continue thus, they would 
 achieve at length a Revolution. That was his Grace's 
 meaning. 
 
 The Times of June 3 recounted acts of war, the people 
 firing on the police, and the police firing on the people ; 
 the people entrenching themselves in an old castle, and 
 soldiery being sent, with engineers, to lay siege to the 
 castle. It told of ambuscades, and of the people firing 
 under cover of plantations and from behind stone walls. 
 The same journal gave another speech of Archbishop
 
 436 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Croke at Holy Cross. He said : " The movement initiated 
 " by the convict (Dillon), and taken up by the Protestant 
 "young man (Parnell), went on growing and magnifying, 
 " until at last it has reached the magnificent proportions 
 "which it has attained throughout every portion of the 
 " country. . . . The time has come ; the hour has 
 "struck ; the bell has sounded its knell. The time for the 
 " rising of the Irish people has arrived ; and they have 
 " risen accordingly. In tJie development of this mighty 
 " movement, the priesthood of Ireland has had a conspicuous 
 "share. . . . The people have been kept down by 
 " bayonets, and by bayonets they are kept down at present. 
 " But, please God, they are now fully determined, bayonets 
 " or no bayonets, to proclaim, at all events, their wants." 
 An Archbishop, who should be preaching peace at Holy 
 Cross, with the cross, in his heart, of the Redeemer who 
 was led to slaughter as a dumb lamb before the shearers, 
 he donned the coat of mail, and seized the hauberk or 
 falchion, and swore that the hour had come for the rising 
 of the Irish people, and that the bell had sounded the 
 knell of doom to all the English race within their reach. 
 
 The same paper (June 3) narrated how Mr. Gladstone had 
 also played his part in the tragedy. Mr. Gladstone stated 
 that the Government did not intend to take any measures 
 for putting an end to the system of terrorism and incen- 
 diary agitation of which the Land League was the embodi- 
 ment. The Irish Executive, according to something more 
 credible than rumour, had all along been urging the 
 Cabinet to take an energetic line, and been promising that 
 the agitation would vanish like smoke before the least 
 show of energy. The Irish Executive pointed also to the 
 immediate cessation of agitation, on the passing of the 
 Coercion Bills ; or, let us say rather, that there was an 
 immediate lull in the agitation ; because the moment it 
 was seen that nothing would come of the Coercion Bills, the 
 agitation began again in an exacerbated form. That was the 
 advice of the Irish Executive ; but evidently Mr. Gladstone
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 437 
 
 always resolutely determined to preserve an attitude of 
 at least neutrality towards the Land League. For seven 
 months there was this conflict of those who were respon- 
 sible for the due government of Ireland, against Mr. Glad- 
 stone with his servile Cabinet in England. And why ? 
 The " chapel bell," which Mr. Gladstone required to hear, 
 had not yet rung ; the knell of doom, to which he looked 
 forward, had not yet sounded. 
 
 No. LXIII. 
 
 ON the evening of June 3, Mr. Parnell exhorted the 
 Government to follow the advice of Archbishop Croke, 
 to confess that the bell had been rung, and that the knell 
 of doom had been sounded ; or, at least, that the tocsin 
 had been beaten, and the roll of the military drum had 
 been heard. Mr. Parnell called upon them to " withdraw 
 " the police and military," " so as to leave the landlords 
 " and tenants " to fight it out between themselves ; and he 
 promised that, if the Government should refuse to do this, 
 not alone would the blood of landlords be shed, but 
 further retaliation would be taken. In other words, he 
 asked the Government to enter openly and avowedly into a 
 conspiracy to defy the law, and resist the constituted 
 authority of the Sovereign. 
 
 The year before, Mr. Gladstone had described evic- 
 tions, the sole and legal remedy which the landlords 
 possessed for non-fulfilment of contract on the part of 
 the tenants, as "tantamount to a sentence of death." 
 Now, Mr. Parnell invites Mr. Gladstone to proclaim 
 openly that he has entered the conspiracy to retaliate 
 for such sentences of death, by shedding the blood of 
 landlords; and to agree in the grossly immoral doctrine 
 advanced by Mr. Parnell and Archbishop Croke, that : 
 "the people of Ireland are perfectly guiltless (in " with- 
 drawing the rent) whether able or not to pay." If
 
 438 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Archbishop Croke cannot preach justice, peace, and good- 
 will towards men, no more can he evince the slightest 
 scintilla of forbearance or generosity towards his assumed 
 opponents. Very few landlords had been unjust; yet he 
 said that all landlords were unjust. The injustice of a 
 landlord would not justify injustice on the part of the 
 tenant ; yet he counselled all tenants to act unjustly in 
 retaliation. He complained of the " terrorism " of some 
 landlords ; and he counselled all Irishmen to join a League, 
 and to exert the most fearful terrorism, and to ruin, not 
 only landlords, but also innocent mortgagees, annuitants, 
 rent-chargers, jointured widows, and younger children, who 
 were otherwise unprovided for. For all these poor, innocent, 
 unoffending creatures, Archbishop Croke had no word of 
 sympathy. His gospel was hard, relentless, harsh, and 
 devilish towards widows and orphans, the very contra- 
 diction of the Gospel of Christ. Such was that teacher of 
 religion ; and " Protestant " Parnell was his disciple. The 
 latter said, in the House of Commons, after advising that 
 the military and police should be withdrawn : " Let us see 
 " whether there will be that willingness on the part of the 
 " people to submit quietly to the terms of the landlords or 
 "not." Parnell, in the garb of Mephisto-Croke, agitated 
 and inflamed the ignorant and brutal tenantry to blood- 
 heat, and then exhorted the Government to leave the land- 
 lords to their mercy, in order merely to prove, what we 
 already knew, that the tenants would have no mercy at 
 all, at least, as long as they were under the influence of 
 Parnell, Croke, and Co. 
 
 But Croke did not stand alone in Ireland. The other 
 Romanist bishops supported him. And what Croke was 
 in Ireland, Manning was in England ; and other bishops 
 supported Manning. On July 10, 1881, a deputation of 
 Irish labourers had an interview with Cardinal Manning. 
 He said : " I have always felt that what are called Trades 
 " Unions, are most legitimate associations for the protec- 
 " tion of the common interests of the man. I have always
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 439 
 
 "felt, and have written and published my opinions, that 
 " the Land League, keeping within the limits of the law 
 "human and Divine, is a lawful association (i.e., if it is 
 " lawful, it is lawful, Q. E. D.), and would never have one 
 "vvo:d of disregard from my lips. I limit my words most 
 " carefully, because my duty, at any cost, is to speak the 
 "truth. I believe that, in the action of your good and 
 " faithful bishops and clergy, and particularly the way in 
 "which the Archbishop of Cashel (Dr. Croke) has lately 
 " spoken with such great force and minuteness on this great 
 " land question, there is now a prevailing interest to guide 
 "and direct the Association of the Land League into a 
 " safe path. . . . There was never a time in the history 
 " of Ireland when she had so much wealth as now, poor 
 " as she might be ; there never was, in the history of 
 " Ireland, a time when the Catholic population of Ireland 
 " possessed so much soil, and when the tenants of the soil 
 " were so united. There never was a time when the people 
 " of Ireland were so well educated as now, or when, to take 
 " a test for example, there were so many newspapers." In 
 the middle of August, Mr. A. M. Sullivan, M.P., wrote a 
 letter in the newspapers, in which he declared " the open 
 " secret " that Cardinal Manning was a " Land Leaguer." 
 
 The Land Act was passed with but slight alterations in 
 the Lords ; and Mr. Gladstone lost no time in showering his 
 rewards on the Irish party and Land Leaguers, doubtless for 
 the agitation which they had got up and maintained in Ire- 
 land, and the obstruction they had promoted in the House 
 of Commons. Mr. Litton, M.P., who had been elected only 
 the previous year (1880), was appointed one of the three 
 Commissioners under the Land Act Mr. Fay, M.P., was 
 made solicitor to the Irish Land Court. He was another 
 Home Ruler. Mr. John George McCarthy, first elected to 
 Parliament in 1874, and Mr. Givan, first elected to Parlia- 
 ment the previous year (1880), were offered the posts of 
 Assistant Commissioners. They were both Home Rulers. 
 Mr. Murrogh O'Brien, nephew of the late William Smith
 
 440 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 O'Brien, the rebel, was made secretary to the Land Act 
 Commission. Dr. Robert Dyer Lyons, first elected as 
 Home Rule member of Parliament the previous year, was 
 made a member of the General Council of Medical Edu- 
 cation and Registration of the United Kingdom ; and Mr. 
 George Fottrell, the "confidential solicitor" of the Land 
 League, was appointed solicitor to the Land Commission, 
 at a salary of ;iooo a year. The Assistant Commissioners 
 received annual salaries of 1000 a year; the lay as- 
 sistants 750 a year ; and the Commissioners, I believe, 
 5000 a year. 
 
 While these very young members of Parliament, but 
 experienced Land Leaguers, were rejoicing and gloating 
 over the spoils of the country, the Jesuit review, Civilta 
 Cattolica, wrote J concerning the Land Act : " Whatever 
 " injury the Irish proprietors may experience, is but a 
 "weak revenge for all the wrongs and unheard-of in- 
 juries to which the tenants were for centuries and 
 "centuries subjected, in consequence of the confiscations 
 "and penalties inflicted upon them, for no other reason 
 "but that they were Catholics, by the British Govern- 
 "ment. Fortunately those times are now passed, and 
 " the malignant spirit which then prevailed has very nearly 
 "disappeared, or has, at least, become quite powerless; 
 " and every one now shares in the hope expressed by 
 11 Lord Salisbury, when he accepted the Bill as an advan- 
 " tage to the Conservative party" Here the spirit of the 
 Jesuit agitators leaked out a little ; and the concurrence 
 of Lord Salisbury began to be apparent. Because the 
 English Government had oppressed the Roman Catholics 
 some centuries ago, therefore it is right that revenge should 
 be taken on poor, unoffending Irish proprietors now ! No 
 " malignant spirit " now exists ; but the Land Act, for 
 ruining Irish proprietors, is a " weak revenge," which had 
 the concurrence of Lord Salisbury. That measure was a 
 poor revenge ; but it is not all the revenge that will be 
 1 September 17, 1881, p. 756.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 44I 
 
 taken. The Irish are determined to have, not only 
 "justice," but "reparation." It will not be enough to undo 
 every wrong; but they must receive back all that was 
 taken from the Roman Church at the time of the Reforma- 
 tion ; and they must be separated from England, and exist 
 in future as an independent Roman Catholic State. 
 
 " The malignant spirit has disappeared " from the Eng- 
 lish Government, and from the Irish landlords, but not 
 from the tenants, the people, the clergy, and the bishops 
 of Ireland. The boycottings, the cattle-houghings, the 
 beatings and maimings, the midnight shootings, the incen- 
 diary fires, the cruelties to men and women, did they not 
 proceed from a very malignant spirit ? Was the malignant 
 spirit even confined to the tenants who had suffered some 
 wrong? On September 15, the National Convention of 
 the Irish Land League was opened in Dublin. Delegates 
 arrived from all parts of Ireland, and from England and 
 Scotland. Telegrams were delivered from the United 
 States. And the Times remarked: 1 "The most signifi- 
 
 D 
 
 " cant feature of the gathering was the number of Roman 
 " Catholic clergy who were present." 
 
 This then was the time, and this the opportunity to 
 welcome " the message of peace," to preach " Peace and 
 "goodwill toward men." The malefic spirit had died 
 out on the part of the British Government, and of the 
 Irish landlords. A message of peace had been sent. An 
 extraordinary number of Roman Catholic clergy were 
 present to receive the message of peace. Now, then, let 
 us smooth matters over! now let us have, at least, a 
 breaking time in the agitation ! Even if your thirst for 
 vengeance is so strong that you cannot let us have " peace 
 "and goodwill," let us at least have a truce, a Trega di 
 Dio. Shall we not ? " No ; by Heaven, you shall not ! " 
 the Irish Catholic clergy swear. The cries were " No rent," 
 and " Hold the harvest." The meeting was advised to 
 "kick out the message of peace, the Land Act! No 
 1 September 16, 1881.
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "tenant shall pay a single penny of rent, unless at the 
 " point of the bayonet and the mouth of the cannon. The 
 " desire of the people for vengeance is aroused. . . 
 " Vengeance shall now be their motto." The Rev. Father 
 Rowan, of Durrow, Queen's County, said : " The total 
 "extirpation of landlordism, and the planting of the 
 " people in their own soil, is not a political problem, nor 
 " a question of Theology ; it is nothing more than the 
 "restitution of stolen property." The delegates, indeed, 
 scarcely spoke to any question but the abolition of land- 
 lordism and enmity to England. No longer the mild 
 measure of Home Rule was their theme. Nothing but 
 utter and entire separation from Great Britain will now 
 satisfy the Irish agitators and the Irish people. Parnell 
 stated as much. He therefore advised the farmers to do 
 something for the Irish labourers, in order to secure their 
 services in the coming struggle. The Land Act, which 
 was asked for as a " measure of peace," has become but 
 the stepping-stone to vengeance and bloodshed ! 
 
 The Irish Convention in New York, after a long ses- 
 sion 1 agreed to an address proclaiming its intention to 
 destroy all British vessels., wherever they could be found, 
 by means of dynamite and infernal machines secreted in 
 their holds. This would be done (they said) in order 
 that the shipping merchants and insurance companies 
 might be compelled to petition Mr. Gladstone to re- 
 consider the Irish question. They further stated that 
 they had before them only the question of freeing Ire- 
 land, and were independent of all laws and questions bind- 
 ing them to any other duty. What was the policy de- 
 vised by long-headed persons in Ireland, and carried out 
 by the Roman Catholics of that country ? The Times 2 
 asserted that : " Boycotting appears to be extending 
 " more widely, and becoming more cruel in its applica- 
 " tion. In some of the country towns it means the ruin of 
 " the small trader ; and the farmers suffer severely by it. 
 1 Times, August 24, iSSi. 2 September 22.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 443 
 
 " At Baltinglass, and also in other places, sectarian ani- 
 " mosity has added greater bitterness to the practice. It 
 " is stated that the Protestant shopkeepers are not to be 
 " dealt with, unless in cases of absolute necessity." A 
 united Ireland, then, means an Ireland in which a Roman 
 Catholic majority is to crush a Protestant minority ! That 
 is the "justice to Ireland" of which we have heard so 
 much ! The Irish Roman Catholic prelates preferred to 
 use Protestants to work their questions, and to carry out 
 their schemes. Protestants were petted by them, and put 
 in the forefront of the agitations, in order to prove that 
 there was no sectarian feeling on the part of Roman 
 Catholics, and no Roman Catholic object in the agitation. 
 Those Protestants were like the nigger who sat, high up 
 in the tree, on the very bough which he was sent to saw 
 off. 
 
 Let us stop for a moment to consider the theories as to 
 property in land, which were openly broached at the be- 
 ginning of September, 1881. Mr. Parnell told the Irish 
 that the landlords have no right to anything at all, or, at 
 most, to a " prairie value," or " the worth of the land the 
 " moment the Deluge left it." The Communist, Proudhon, 
 said, " La Propriety c'est le vol." Mr. Parnell, and Mr. 
 Gladstone, and the Civilta Cattolica averred that the land 
 must be taken from the landlords, without giving them any 
 compensation in return, as if the landlords had robbed the 
 land from the present tenants. Mr. Bradlaugh affirmed 
 that the landlords, by unjustly raising their rents at the 
 beginning of the century, had fraudulently extorted from 
 the people of Ireland the enormous sum of .150,000,000 
 sterling or more. All those orators, be it remarked, said 
 much the same thing, and took the same steps ; because 
 they were all dancing to one and the same piping. They 
 all supported the socialistic theory that the present distri- 
 bution of property is unequal, and therefore unjust ; and 
 that the only proper remedy is to take from the rich, and 
 give to the poor. Mr. Bradlaugh truly added that the
 
 444 RECENT EVENTS AND A 
 
 Nihilism of Russia, and the Socialism of Germany, are 
 merely different forms of the same upheaving, merely 
 somewhat various results of the same evil. In every 
 country there is the upheaving of the prole'taire, who has 
 nothing of his own except his proles, against the proprti- 
 taire, who enjoys the bequest of his ancestors or the saved 
 results of his own labour and economy. In Ireland, the pro- 
 letaire, by the assistance, or at least with the favour of the 
 Jesuit party, has been eminently successful. How soon 
 will the example be followed in Scotland, Wales, and Eng- 
 land ? With regard to the species of property called land, 
 the socialistic theory has been carried out. How soon will 
 the virus affect stocks and funds, houses, and trading con- 
 cerns and factories ? If property belongs to the whole 
 nation, then one species of property as well as another be- 
 longs to the nation. If the soil of Ireland belongs to the 
 peasants who tread it, then the soil of England belongs to 
 the English peasant who lives on it 
 
 No. LXIV. 
 
 THE Irish Land Act had been passed ; and the Land 
 Commissioners were hastening to put it in operation, to 
 the benefit of the tenant and the robbery of the landlord. 
 The Commissioners published and circulated a long cata- 
 logue, in imposing array, of the advantages which the new 
 legislation offered to the Irish tenants. This was the 
 signal for a rapid multiplication and exacerbation of Irish 
 outrages. Boycotting was extended, and became more 
 cruel in its application. The execution of legal processes 
 was always successfully resisted by mobs, more riotous than 
 ever. The newspapers were filled with examples of law- 
 lessness, popular tyranny, popular cruelties, incendiarism, 
 raids for arms, midnight visits for purposes of intimidation 
 or slaughter, and carried out by large parties of masque- 
 raders. Graves were dug by night, and left ready to receive
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 445 
 
 the mangled corpses of the morrow, as soon as the victims 
 should have fallen. Threatening notices were posted up on 
 gate-posts, or sent by Her Majesty's post For order, there 
 was popular tyranny; for peace, there was tyranny; for 
 law, there was tyrannical lawlessness, everywhere in 
 Ireland. Pass the Land Act, and paralyse the Land 
 League, had been Gladstone's pretext. When the Land 
 Act was passed, the Land League received new strength 
 and feared less to show the bitterness of revenge. The 
 Land League had long administered their own rules in 
 Ireland, to the exclusion of the Queen's laws. It will 
 administer the Land Act too ; or else the Land Act shall 
 become a dead letter. The " message of peace " shall not 
 pacify Ireland, unless you agree to separate Ireland entirely 
 from England. So the agrarian phase of the movement 
 passed away and it became entirely political, say, rather, 
 revolutionary. 
 
 The Times was puzzled, because it did not know Mr. 
 Gladstone's real aim, while believing fully in his transcen- 
 dent intellect, and unbounded information. " What can 
 " be the motive for this great conspiracy ? " it asked help- 
 lessly at the commencement of a " leader." 1 What can 
 its promoters hope for ? " How comes it that it can be 
 " kept up in opposition to the wishes of a majority of the 
 " Irish people, and to the interests of the entire country ? 
 " It is a tyranny of the worst form. Decent people hold 
 " aloof from it, as far as they can, and dare. It receives 
 " no support from the great body of the merchants, or pro- 
 " fessional men, or tradesmen ; but it flourishes none the 
 " less without them, or in spite of them. . . . The 
 " political agitators are looking forward to the Repeal of 
 " the Act of Union, and to the severance of the connection 
 "with England. Any form of disturbance is welcome 
 " which has a tendency to this end." To show how averse 
 Ireland was to the tyranny which the Jesuits and the League 
 were strong enough to impose upon Ireland, against the 
 
 1 Sept. 24.
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 supposed efforts of Mr. Gladstone and the Queen's Govern- 
 ment, the Times recorded some figures which had been 
 mentioned by Mr. Forster in a speech in Parliament : Out 
 of .10,707 received by the League, only 162 has been 
 subscribed by Ireland. During a subsequent week 1,250 
 is. had been received, and of that sum 1,200 had come 
 from America ; leaving 50 is. as the total subscriptions 
 from the large towns in England and Scotland, and from 
 Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other places. Truly 
 it was a wonderful conspiracy which succeeded in imposing 
 itself on Ireland, against the wishes of Ireland, unless, in- 
 deed, we can suppose that some unseen secret and ubi- 
 quitous power supported it by dark machinations. 
 
 There was at this time 1 the prospect of "a splendid 
 " harvest " ; and yet we learned that in Ireland " all is 
 " disquietude, distrust, and despondency on the part of 
 " classes who have material interests at stake, and see 
 <' the hostile influences which are combined, as if with 
 " the malevolent purpose of making prosperity impos- 
 *' sible. ... A system of tyranny, most perfectly or- 
 " ganized, and more terrible than any of which the Pole 
 " or the Christian Turk has ever complained, is now carried 
 " out ; it is remorseless and inexorable. It has crushed all 
 " feeling of manly independence out of the mind of the 
 " people, and the most respectable, as well as the humblest 
 " classes, show an abject submission to it. ... The 
 " humiliations, which are submitted to in order to avoid 
 " its ruinous vengeance, are pitiful to witness ; but the 
 " slaves, who bow the neck to the yoke, cannot be blamed, 
 " for they see no power so strong, resolute, and determined." 
 There were given, in the same number of the Times, de- 
 scriptions of serious riots, arising out of intolerant bigotry, 
 against preachers of the Irish Evangelical Society, although 
 the Roman Catholic priest of the parish, and his curate, 
 made pretended endeavours to make the rioters desist. 
 
 The next column of the Times gave the report of a 
 1 Times, September 26.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 447 
 
 speech in which Mr. Parnell again avowed that his aim, 
 in fomenting the Land League agitation, was that which 
 the Jesuits had always entertained. He said : " Citizens 
 "of Dublin, Here, under the shadow of the Castle of 
 "English misrule in Dublin, the stronghold of British 
 " misgovernment, you have assembled together once more 
 " in your thousands to proclaim your unalterable deter- 
 " mination to obtain the self-government of the Irish 
 " people. . . . The spirit that is alive in Ireland to-day 
 " the spirit which is shown in every quarter and in 
 " every corner of Ireland that spirit will never die until 
 " it sweeps that detested alien rule, with its buckshot and 
 " its bayonets, clear away over the Channel, whence it 
 " came, never to return. . . . We ask to rule ourselves. 
 " We ask that Irishmen shall make laws on Irish soil 
 " for Irishmen." 
 
 When Mr. Parnell went to Dublin to make that speech, 
 he received such an ovation, and made such a triumphal 
 entry into the city, as had not been seen since the days 
 of O'Connell. He was evidently the powerful man of 
 Ireland. Whether intoxicated by success, or rendered 
 courageous by Government complicity, he proclaimed 
 absolutely that the object of all the agitation was to 
 sweep away " the detested alien rule " of England. When 
 Mr. Gladstone cut down one branch of the Upas-tree of 
 Protestant ascendency, Mr. Gladstone called it an " alien 
 Church." He was then reminded that if he destroyed that 
 Church, he would be, in fact, annulling the Act of Union 
 between England and Ireland. Forewarned, he cut down 
 that branch. 
 
 At Maryborough, shortly afterwards, Mr. Parnell ex- 
 plained what he meant by a " fair rent " ; viz., no rent 
 at all. He said that no settlement of the land question 
 could be final, "till the cultivators of the soil shall be 
 "made the owners thereof." In other words, the land- 
 lords, mostly Protestant, were to be expatriated. The 
 other branch of the Upas-tree of Protestant ascendency
 
 448 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 must be cut down. This was to be accomplished, as 
 Mr. Parnell explained, in order to render possible the 
 separation of Ireland, and its autonomy as a Roman 
 Catholic State. That was the old Jesuit conspiracy of 
 Tyrconnel. 
 
 In the autumn of 1881, Mr. Parnell published the 
 following words : " Irish landlordism was one of the props 
 " of English misrule in Ireland. Well ; we have nearly 
 " cut and hacked that prop in two ; and before many 
 " months have gone by, I think we shall have cut it away 
 "altogether." On a previous occasion, Mr. Parnell had 
 openly avowed : " I would not have gone to this work, if 
 " I had not known that we were laying the foundation, 
 " in this land movement, for the regeneration of our legisla- 
 tive independence." Later in the year 1881, Mr. Parnell 
 said : " The great principle of the Land League was, that 
 " the land of Ireland did not, and ought not, to belong to 
 " the landlords, but to the people ; and, in order to carry 
 " out that principle, as far as it was possible, we offered 
 "to the landlords a compromise, in order to obtain a 
 "peaceable solution of the question. We offered to give 
 " them whatever value they could prove the land of Ireland 
 "had, when the waters of the Flood left it; and if we can 
 "carry out that programme, and we have partially carried 
 " it out by the Bill just passed, we shall reduce the rental 
 " of Ireland from seventeen millions to about two or three 
 "millions a year." In their endeavour the Land League 
 were supported by the priests of Ireland. 
 
 The Rev. Eugene Sheehy, Roman Catholic Clergy- 
 man of Kilmallock, said : " We have met to chronicle 
 "the ancient resolve of Ireland, that the country must 
 " be ours. That has been the tradition and the sworn 
 " vow of ages, and we stand here in our thousands to 
 "repeat it once more, and to register solemnly the vow 
 "transmitted to us, that we will not stop until we have 
 " planted the glorious banner of Ireland, not alone on the 
 f< ruins of landlord power in this country, but on the ruins of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 449 
 
 " that Government and that alien race which it represents. 
 It is no longer so much ' Down with land- 
 lordism!' as, 'Down with English rule in Ireland!' 
 "... I see the soul of a new spirit, the grand ideal 
 " possesses our souls, and we will not be content until our 
 " country is made a nation among nations." 
 
 At a meeting at Maynooth, the Irish Roman Catholic 
 bishops met to pass resolutions in favour of the Land Act 
 as a fair removal of all grievances. But many bishops 
 were in favour of "ulterior measures," and refused to 
 concur with their brethren. Among the dissenting bishops 
 were Dr. Croke, Archbishop of Cashel ; Dr. McHale, 
 Archbishop of Tuam ; the Bishop of Ross, the Bishop 
 of Cloyne, the Bishop of Cork, and all the others who 
 had identified themselves with the Nationalist cause. The 
 milder bishops passed the resolutions concerning the Land 
 Act, and other resolutions, demanding practically that the 
 Roman Catholic Colleges should be endowed by the 
 State. This was a step which went beyond the Establish- 
 ment of the new Roman Catholic University, and the 
 consequent dissolution of the Queen's University. 
 
 At this moment, all who had been " cornered " by 
 means of the agitation ; all who had been coerced into 
 yielding what English Liberalism and Scotch Radicalism 
 would otherwise never have consented to give ; and all 
 those members of the Cabinet who were not in the secret, 
 supposed that the support of the Roman Catholic 
 bishops, at that critical juncture, was of the utmost im- 
 portance, and well worth any sacrifice to obtain. Those 
 few who were in the secret, looked on the whole as at a 
 farce on the stage of a theatre, and saw Gladstone 
 acting his part, while the bishops strutted in support 
 of their role. The agitators, the Land League, the 
 Home Rule members were, as they knew, and as Cardinal 
 Manning once told me, "the great guns under whose 
 " fire all their demands would be wrung from the British 
 " Parliament." So great a labour was it to establish Mr. 
 
 G G
 
 450 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Gladstone's avowed principle, of " governing Ireland ac- 
 " cording to Irish ideas ! " 
 
 That labour had, however, been so far successful. At 
 least Mr. O'Donnell, M.P., thought so. Speaking at 
 Dungarvan, on Oct. 5, he said : " There are at present two 
 " governments in Ireland, the Government of Mr. Glad- 
 " stone, which nobody minds ; and the Government of the 
 " Land League. The Land League is the true self-govern^ 
 " ment, which now reigns supreme over Gladstone and 
 " Company. We have solved the question of self-govern- 
 " ment; for Ireland is now virtually a self-governed nation." 
 Mr. R. Power, M.P., then spoke, and said : " The cry of 
 " the Irish People is : The land of Ireland for the people 
 " of Ireland ; and a free Parliament for a free people ! 
 " For behind the glorious land movement is the movement 
 " for the legislative independence of Ireland." Mr. Glad- 
 stone followed, at Leeds, with a great speech, which the 
 public prints characterized as "calculated to dispirit the 
 " English public, as much as it is likely to encourage the 
 " Land League." x It was said, also, with much point, that 
 the Irish question " is one of special importance, and of 
 "peculiar and even painful interest to Mr. Gladstone per- 
 " sonally ; IT is ESSENTIALLY HIS QUESTION, his by right 
 " of creation, as well as by right of treatment. HE IS MORE 
 "THAN SUSPECTED OF HAVING FOSTERED AND AGGRA- 
 " VATED THE DISEASE OF ANARCHY FROM WHICH IRELAND 
 " IS SUFFERING." No doubt he was suspected of having 
 fostered the anarchy ; he that enabled Parnell to browbeat 
 the British Parliament, and so become a hero in Ireland, 
 where he would otherwise have been only scouted. It was 
 he who agreed to keep back the police and insure their 
 inaction, while Parnell stirred up the agitation. It was he 
 who, by his speech at Leeds, made Parnell " a great man," 
 by setting him up as the rival of the Prime Minister him- 
 self. By putting Parnell's government before the world, 
 
 1 See St. James's Gazette, Oct. 8.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 451 
 
 as the only effective government in Ireland, and as the 
 successful antagonist of the Queen's Government, he 
 enormously increased the agitation for separation. How 
 could he have elevated Parnell more ? What more could 
 he have done for him ? He made out the struggle between 
 law and lawlessness to be a duel between the Queen's 
 Government and Parnell's rule. But was it a duel ? or was 
 it complicity ? Was it antagonism ? was it opposition, 
 at least while Gladstone guided the Queen's Government ? 
 Gladstone's aim was " self-government " for Ireland ; Par- 
 nell's aim was the independence of Ireland tweedledum 
 and tweedledee ! 
 
 On Oct. 7, Lord R. B. told me a curious fact in proof 
 of the proposition which his Lordship had advanced and 
 maintained, namely, that " Gladstone was in league *cvitk 
 " Parnell" The Editor of the newspaper in Castlebar 
 had been for a long time writing the most seditious articles 
 in favour of the Land League, and in favour of the 
 separation of Ireland from England, and of a Revolution 
 to attain that end. No one interfered with him. At last 
 Parnell came to Castlebar to hold a meeting. Parnell 
 seemed to slight the Editor, and a quarrel arose between 
 them. The next week there began a series of articles 
 against Parnell. The Editor was seized at once, and 
 clapped into Kilmainham gaol. The landlords he might 
 attack ; revolution he might stir up ; the Queen's authority 
 mio-ht be lessened in Ireland. That seemed all in Glad- 
 
 o 
 
 stone's line. But to attack Parnell, Gladstone's instru- 
 ment, was an offence which could not, for an instant, 
 be tolerated ! 
 
 The same tactics were evident at Leeds. Mr. Parnell 
 was, by Mr. Gladstone, made a great man, and raised to 
 a position of rivalry to the Queen of this great Empire. 
 Mr. Gladstone moreover admitted that Parnell had check- 
 mated him by the clever device of selecting " test cases," 
 which would either try the effect of the Land Act, and 
 cover it with ridicule, or else would create precedents in
 
 452 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 favour of the tenants. If the Land Court cut down the 
 rents in the proportion which Mr. Parnell stated as the 
 minimum, namely from ,17,000,000 to 3,000,000, then 
 the Protestant landlords would be utterly ruined, and might 
 be cheaply bought out. But if the Land Court should 
 shrink from doing such a glaring injustice, then Parnell 
 would tell the Irish that they had been betrayed ; that the 
 Land Act was a snare, a sham, and a delusion ; and that 
 the Queen's Land Court was worthless ; and further, that 
 nothing short of separation from England would be of any 
 avail. As if to make it clear that the aim of the agitation 
 was not to procure a remedy for the " distress and miseries 
 "of Irish tenants," but to drive the two countries apart, 
 Mr. Gladstone stated that the savings of the Irish tenants, 
 out of their profits, in the savings banks of Ireland, had, in 
 a quarter of a century, risen from seven millions to thirty 
 millions sterling, irrespective of the many other investments 
 of savings during the same period. 
 
 Yet none of these things were desired by the Irish 
 nation ; none of them were the aspirations of the people. 
 Even if they were, it would not have proved them to be 
 just, nor to be a ground, per se, for granting them. But 
 they were not generally desired. These schemes had been 
 devised in the closet. The agitation was carried on by 
 a few. The Land League was established, and worked by 
 force, with terrors and intimidations. Many, who hated 
 the scheme, were thus pressed into its ranks, and then 
 carried on by compulsion, by excitement, by sympathy, 
 and by the force of numbers. They were carried on, 
 blindly, without thinking, nor being able even to perceive 
 whither they were tending. Some there might have been, 
 doubtless, who took fright and felt uneasy, and longed for 
 a power, stronger than their local land leagues, to free them 
 from their irksome and dangerous slavery. They silently 
 wondered at the apathy of the Government, and gazed 
 heart-stricken at the ever-growing power and ever-increas- 
 ing violence and audacity of the Land League tyrant.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 453 
 
 Why (they asked) should those relentless, remorseless, re- 
 vengeful revolutionists, who are keeping the whole country 
 in turmoil and terror, be permitted to rove the country 
 unmolested ? Why should those thorns be allowed to 
 crackle any longer under the seething caldron of Ireland ? 
 Some, it is true, have been put in gaol for a too outspoken 
 zeal ; but many more have been incarcerated for sowing 
 discords and making differences in the ranks of the land- 
 leaguers, and for daring to advance opinions of their own. 
 None of those who were put in prison were the most efficient 
 workers in the system of agitation and ferment ; while those 
 who had free scope and ranged the country unobstructed, 
 were the very ones who were versed in the diabolical arts 
 of lighting the lurid flames of discontent, disaffection, and 
 dire sedition. What then can be the policy of the Govern- 
 ment ? Now that the Oriental Beaconsfield has passed 
 away, have we a new sphinx at the helm of the State ? 
 We know, from Mr. Gladstone's former career, that he is 
 not weak and flabby ; but can be firm even dictatorial 
 when the occasion requires it. What, then, can he mean 
 by his present action ? 
 
 It is true that he has just raised Mr. Parnell to a lofty 
 eminence, and then charged him with inciting to plunder. 
 Here is another puzzle ! A few obscure individuals have 
 been imprisoned for inciting to plunder, and yet plunder- 
 preaching Parnell the head and front of the offence is 
 allowed to go free ! Nay, all the local presidents of the 
 vast organization for plunder are unmolested, while country 
 editors who attacked Parnell have to languish in durance 
 vile ! There is evidently some close relation between Mr. 
 Parnell and Mr. Gladstone.
 
 454 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. LXV. 
 
 THERE was some close connection between the Protestant 
 Parnell and the Romanist Archbishop Croke, as their two 
 synchronous speeches reveal. Archbishop Croke was 
 speaking at Thurles, while Parnell was parleying at Wex- 
 ford. The following extract is from the speech of Arch- 
 bishop Croke : " But what was the use of having fixity of 
 " tenure if they were bound to pay exorbitant rents ? 
 " What was the use of becoming the owner of improve- 
 " ments if they could be confiscated to pay a rack-renting 
 " landlord ? . . . The real value of the Act was to be 
 " estimated not by fixity of tenure or the value of the im- 
 " provements, but by the actual reduction of the rental of 
 " Ireland which the Commissioners were prepared to make. 
 " . . . They ought to make provision for the tillers of 
 " the soil and their families. That was what he considered 
 "a fair settlement of the land question. When they found 
 " the labourers wholesomely fed, fairly clad, and decently 
 "housed, then, indeed, whatever remained, after making 
 " suitable provision for their families, they might give to 
 " the landlords." 
 
 Mr. Parnell took exactly the same line at Wexford ; but 
 there is not space for more than the following extracts : 
 " What Ireland demands to-day is not so much security 
 " of tenure as that these rack rents may be cut down 
 " wholesale, so as to enable tenant farmers to perform their 
 " duties to the labourers, artisans, shopkeepers, merchants, 
 " and society in general. ... I am proceeding in the de- 
 " mand that I will make that improvements of the tenant 
 " and his predecessors in title shall be his, no matter how 
 " long ago they may have been made I am proceeding 
 " upon the lines of an amendment in the Land Act of iSS i 
 " which was introduced by Mr. Healy, framed by Mr. Glad- 
 " stone's Attorney-General for Ireland, and sanctioned by 
 " Mr. Gladstone and his whole Cabinet. ... I say 
 " that this doctrine of public plunder is a question of degree ;
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 455 
 
 "and, as William Ewart Gladstone has shown himself 
 " capable of eating his words, and able to recede from prin- 
 " ciples and declarations which he has laid down, why, with 
 "just as much fervour as that with which he made the 
 " speech the other evening, he will, before long, if he lives 
 " long enough, introduce a Bill into the House of Com- 
 " mons to extend this very principle of public plunder 
 " which he has sanctioned by his Act of 1881." 
 
 Just afterwards, on the nth of October, two other 
 speeches were delivered. Dillon declared at the Land 
 League meeting in Dublin that Mr. Gladstone, "by his 
 "speech at Leeds the other day, has administered the 
 "coup de grace to British legislation in Ireland." Lord 
 Salisbury, at Newcastle, said : " Last year the Government 
 " were told by no mean authority they were told by the 
 "judges on the bench that trial by jury in Ireland had 
 " become a fiction, that the country was in a state of 
 " absolute disorder. No attempt was made all last year 
 " to prevent the most horrible outrages which were per- 
 " petrated upon those who tried to execute the common 
 " processes of the law. Neither life nor property was 
 " safe. . . . T/ie landlords were running for their lives, 
 " The Government absolutely declined to move. They took 
 " no steps whatever to reinforce the failing powers of the 
 " law. They allowed the autumn and winter to pass without 
 " one effort to save those whose most ordinary rights were 
 " being imperilled, whose lives were being endangered by 
 "the conspiracy which was assuming all the powers of 
 " government ; but the Government declined to move, and 
 " wJien we pressed them to justify their inaction we were told 
 " in hardly covert terms that it was necessary that the dis- 
 " order should mount to a point which sliould convince tJte 
 " members of the Liberal party in the House of Commons, 
 " before they fould venture to interfere, . . . Animals 
 " might be hamstrung, houses might be burnt, men might 
 " be ' carded,' or stripped, or beaten, or murdered, but all 
 " this was of small account so long as the party that
 
 456 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " supported the Government was kept together. . . . 
 " The administration of this Coercion Act has been the 
 " laughing-stock of everybody. The Government has, I 
 " believe, locked tip 150 second-rate personages, whose presence 
 " or absence was, no doubt, of importance to their families 
 " or themselves, but was wholly immaterial to the peace of the 
 " country. The Government have never ventured to lay 
 " hands upon any of the main promoters of disorder ; or, if 
 " they have done it in one or two cases, they have hastened 
 " with trembling hands to release them." 
 
 The next day an article appeared in the Jesuit organ of 
 Paris, the Univers, in which they said : " Ireland has still 
 " reparation to obtain as regards her religious and civil 
 " liberties, especially on the education question. We hope 
 " she will obtain them." 
 
 The 1 3th of October seemed to give the lie to all our 
 proofs of conspiracy. The Cabinet met on Wednesday, 
 and sat for four hours in stormy, nay angry, and impas- 
 sioned discussion. Mr. Gladstone had his way ; and when 
 the Cabinet rose, Mr. Forster snatched a hasty dinner 
 and left by the evening mail for Ireland. On Thursday 
 morning, the I3th, Mr. Parnell was arrested. Was Mr. 
 Gladstone then angry with the rival he himself had set 
 up ? In the mock duel, did he slip a ball on the top of 
 his blank cartridge and mortally wound his unsuspecting 
 antagonist ? If so, why did he wait until the Irish had 
 accumulated plenty of arms with American money ; and 
 plenty of courage in the exciting fierceness of the agitation, 
 before he fired his shot ? Why did he defer the blow 
 until Dillon could announce that "the Irish people are 
 "perfectly prepared to face it"? Why did he, in the 
 Leeds speech, a few days before, goad and taunt the land- 
 lords into lynch-law measures of retaliation ? Why did he 
 gibe and jeer at their want of moral courage, in not yield- 
 ing support to those who desired to resist the League ? 
 Why did he ask, " What would happen in England if 
 " agrarian offences were committed, and sometimes aug-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 457 
 
 " mented by horrible and disgraceful cruelty, and even 
 " with loss of life, and if the crime could not be put down 
 "by the exertions of the ordinary authorities ?" Did he 
 mean to incite the Protestant landlords to acts of violence, 
 in order to have an excuse for sweeping them away 
 altogether ? 
 
 A meeting of the Executive of the Land League was 
 speedily called to deliberate. The Rev. Dr. Kavanagh, 
 a Romanist, boldly proclaimed that nothing would satisfy 
 them until the right of self-government was granted to 
 Ireland. Another Roman Catholic priest, the Rev. Joseph 
 Farrell, went to the true grounds of Mr. Gladstone's move : 
 " He was not sorry that Mr. Gladstone had put his threat 
 " into execution ; as it would have the effect of making 
 " more binding their union, and banishing every element of 
 ^discord; and they had their hands free to fight the battle 
 " of the Irish people. . . . The Land League was the 
 " Irish people. They must remember that, in this great 
 " cause, they must stand or fall together." The Rev. 
 Father then recommended "Boycotting, or declaring a 
 " man to be a public enemy, and refusing, on that ground, 
 "to have anything whatsoever to do with him, and to 
 " make it, as far as lay in the people's power, impossible 
 " for such a man to live happily with the people whose 
 " notions he outraged." That step of Mr. Gladstone gave, 
 then, the required cohesion to the Land League and people 
 of Ireland, in order (as the Rev. Doctor said) that they 
 might " acquire the right of self-government ;" and the 
 action of the Land League, in ruining the Protestant land- 
 lords, was only a means to the acquisition of self-govern- 
 ment for Ireland, or the separation of Ireland from 
 England. Mr. Parnell made no secret of this when he 
 .was " interviewed " in prison by a reporter who sent his 
 notes to the Standard. 1 The following is an extract from 
 that report. 
 
 Mr. Parnell said : " The great difficulty about giving Ire- 
 1 Oct. 15.
 
 458 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " land the rights of autonomy, is the existence of tJie landlord 
 "class in the country. . . . If the land question were 
 "settled, every other qiiestion, I think, would settle itself" 
 
 For many long years, the Ultramontane policy has been 
 to procure the independence of Ireland to sever it from 
 Protestant England. The Land League agitation has been 
 carried on in order to abolish the Protestant landlords of 
 Ireland as a step to the ulterior end of separation. 
 Parnell and the others were therefore working in subordi- 
 nation to Mr. Gladstone ; and it is remarkable what care 
 was taken of them what solicitude was exerted towards 
 securing their comforts, directly they were shut up in gaol. 
 From the Times of Monday, October 17, we learn that : 
 "Mr. Parnell has been allotted the best room in the in- 
 "firmary, having been fortunately provided with a slight 
 " cold, which enabled Dr. Kenny who appears to be installed 
 "as physician to the prisoners, as well as treasurer to the 
 "Land League in Mr. Egans absence to order his chiefs 
 " removal at once into that part of the prison. This is a 
 " very great advantage, as the usual prison rules have been 
 " suspended, and free intercourse is allowed between the in- 
 " mates of the infirmary who are supposed, by a generous 
 " fiction, to be so ill as to require special care and separa- 
 " tion from the other prisoners." 
 
 Mr. Dillon, who, we are informed, was much improved 
 in health by the interval of liberty which he enjoyed since 
 his last imprisonment, "has been, of -course, placed in the in- 
 "firmary. Mr. Sexton is suffering from temporary illness. 
 "Mr. O'Brien is also of a very delicate constitution, and 
 " was obliged some time ago to take a voyage to Egypt to 
 " recruit his health. The other prisoners do not complain 
 " of any indisposition. Mr. A. O'Connor has not been yet 
 " arrested, and is believed to have effected his escape. It 
 " is a singular fact that he was actually in Kilmainham 
 "gaol on Friday, visiting his friends. At that hour the 
 " police were waiting outside in expectation of his arrest. 
 " The officers of police had a warrant to take him, but he
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 459 
 
 " walked out of the prison, and no attempt was made to 
 "capture or follow him." 
 
 To be an agitator under the orders of Mr. Gladstone, is 
 not so bad a thing, after all ! You are given free board 
 and lodgings, and made as comfortable as you can be ; 
 you are protected from every evil consequence of your 
 agitation, while you are allowed to continue your intrigues 
 with your brother agitators ; secure from molestation, in 
 delightful quiet, and even indolent luxury for which 
 object your brother agitators are sent to the prison with 
 you ! 
 
 The cue of the Land League orators at the present 
 crisis was to abuse the English Government, and Mr. 
 Gladstone also ; in order to keep up appearances, and 
 obviate the suspicion of complicity, and to advise " the 
 "masses to abstain from violence." The Times leader 
 added, with significance : " The arguments, if we can call 
 "them such, with which the Land League orators have 
 " assailed the conduct of the Government, are scarcely 
 " meant to carry conviction to the Irish mind. The classes 
 " u>ho have given Mr. Parnell their sympathy and support in 
 " his efforts to separate England from Ireland, are not in- 
 terested in the demonstration attempted, very unsuccess- 
 " fully and unskilfully, by several speakers at the Rotunda 
 "meeting on Friday night." The latter were, of course, 
 not in the secret, and therefore made a mess of it. 
 
 The same paper gave also the comments of foreign 
 official and non-official journals of influence. They are 
 very instructive. The New York World told its numerous 
 readers that : " Mr. Parnell, by co-operating with Mr. 
 " Gladstone, enabled Mr. Forster to make Ireland an armed 
 " camp" The very thing Lord Tyrconnel did ! The 
 New York Tribune thought of the secret aim of Mr. 
 Gladstone in arresting Parnell : " The Premier has taken 
 " an enormous risk on himself in making this arrest ; for 
 " it may end in making Mr. Parnell far more powerful 
 " than O'Connell ever was at his best, and in prejudicing tlie
 
 460 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Irish people for whole generations . . . against every 
 " measure conceived at Westminster'' That is : the arrest of 
 Mr. Parnell, and his position " in the best room in the 
 " infirmary," will add greatly to Parnell's power, and be of 
 enormous assistance in separating Ireland from England. 
 The PJiiladelphia Public Ledger thought Mr. Gladstone 
 wonderfully imprudent; because it did not know the real 
 grounds of Mr. Gladstone's action. It thought that he 
 deliberately marred his own success, because it did not 
 know Mr. Gladstone's aim. It always flatters our pride 
 to think a clever man imprudent ; and it saves us the 
 trouble of searching out his principle of action and the 
 object he would attain. " If the British Ministry had 
 " deliberately set themselves to do the most impolitic 
 " thing possible, in the present condition of Irish affairs, 
 " they could have hit on no likelier thing for the purpose 
 " than the arrest of Mr. Parnell. It was sure to set that 
 " country in such a flame as to compel the Ministry to take 
 "the back track, or to go a great deal further and fare 
 " infinitely worse. They were dull-witted men who thought 
 "such a course could mend matters or do anything but 
 " strengthen the hands of the men which it is their true 
 " policy to weaken." 
 
 The personal organ of Prince Bismarck pleased itself 
 by being sarcastic, and by giving broad hints, in order to 
 show that it understood the game. Prof. Gneist knows 
 about the English Constitution ; and so does M. Lothair 
 Bucher. 
 
 The Ultramontane paper, the Univers, prophesied : " It 
 " will be easier to imprison the whole Irish nation than 
 " to force it to admire and relish the sweets of English 
 "rule in Ireland. . . . When we evoke all these 
 "recollections, we cannot avoid feeling pity for unhappy 
 " Ireland." The Parlement held Mr. Gladstone " largely 
 " responsible for the state of anarchy ; for he encouraged 
 " the Home Rulers' aspirations." The Roman Catholic 
 Monde spoke from knowledge : " It is a fresh phase in the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 461 
 
 " long struggle of St. Patrick's sons against the Saxon in- 
 " vadersr 
 
 Such were the comments of the European and American 
 press, on the arrest of Mr. Parnell. There is no doubt that 
 it was but a little incident in the struggle between the 
 Roman Catholics of Ireland and the Protestant Govern- 
 ment of England, between the Celt and the Saxon, be- 
 tween the descendants of Cham and the descendants of 
 Japheth. There is no doubt also that the Government 
 of England placed themselves in an indefensible and 
 even ridiculous position. What they alleged against the 
 Land League, in the Dublin proclamation, was true, to 
 the same extent, a year ago. If it was right to act now, 
 it would have been right long before. If it was their duty 
 to defend the lives and property of landlords now, it was 
 no less their duty twelve months before. With what 
 object, then, did they defer their action ? Why did they 
 wait ? Was it in order to see whether the Land Act 
 would have the effect of disarming the agitation ? But 
 they took action and arrested Parnell just before the 
 Land Commission began its operations. They knew no 
 more, when the proclamation was issued, than they did a 
 year before, whether concessions, in the shape of the 
 legalised plunder of landlords, would have the effect of 
 stilling the agitation and quieting the country. Why then 
 did they wait for twelve months ? and why did they not 
 continue to defer action a little longer? Because their 
 action, at that moment, was sure to consolidate the people 
 of Ireland in favour of the ulterior step of separating 
 England from Ireland.
 
 462 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. LXVI. 
 
 SUCH a result as that mentioned in my last, indeed, came 
 about ; and was shown by the manifesto which was issued 
 from Kilmainham gaol. This manifesto came, of course, 
 with the connivance of the authorities ; because prisoners 
 cannot communicate with the outer world, except by the 
 sanction of the governor of the prison. This manifesto l 
 was first read at the weekly meeting of the Land League, 
 at which " a number of Roman Catholic priests were 
 " present " ; and the Rev. Mr. Cantwell, of Thurles, was 
 moved to the chair. Many new members, " including 
 " the Franciscan Fathers at Clara," were nominated ; and 
 the secretary then read the manifesto. 
 
 " The Executive of the National Land League, forced 
 " to abandon the policy of testing the Land Act, feels 
 " bound to advise the tenant-farmers of Ireland from this 
 " time forth TO PAY NO RENTS, under any circumstances, 
 " to their landlords, until the Government relinquishes the 
 " existing system of terrorism, and restores the constitu- 
 " tional rights of the people. Your fathers abolished tithes 
 " by the same methods. . . . It is as lawful to refuse 
 " to pay rents as it is to receive them. Against the passive 
 " resistance of an entire population, military power has 
 " no weapons. Do not be wheedled into compromise of 
 " any sort by the dread of eviction. If you only act together 
 " in the spirit to which, within the last two years, you have 
 " countless times pledged your vows, they can no more 
 " evict a whole nation than they can imprison them. . . . 
 " Landlordism is already staggering under the blows wJiick 
 "you have dealt it, amid the applause of the world. One 
 " more crowning struggle for your land, your homes, your 
 " lives one more heroic effort to destroy landlordism at the 
 " very source and fount of its existence, and the system wJiich 
 " was and is the curse of your race and of your existence will 
 " have disappeared for ever. . . . Stand together in the 
 1 Times, October 19.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 463 
 
 " face of the brutal and cowardly enemies of your race ! 
 ' PAY NO RENTS under any pretext." 
 
 The manifesto was signed "Charles Stewart Parnell, 
 " Kilmainham Gaol ; Andrew Kettle, Kilmainham Gaol ; 
 "Michael Davitt, hon. sec., Portland Prison; Thomas 
 " Brennan, hon. sec., Kilmainham Gaol ; John Dillon, head 
 " organizer, Kilmainham Gaol ; Thomas Sexton, head or- 
 " ganizer, Kilmainham Gaol ; Patrick Egan, treasurer, 
 " Paris." 
 
 It will be observed with astonishment that this Revolu- 
 tionary Manifesto was issued from Her Majesty's gaol of 
 Kilmainham. The Government had taken care to arrest 
 the whole Executive Council of the Land League, and to 
 lodge them in the same prison, instead of distributing 
 them among various prisons. The Government also 
 allowed this Executive to occupy comfortable quarters, 
 and have free intercourse with each other, and consult as 
 to their future policy. It was therefore easy for the 
 Executive to draw up and sign the manifesto. How the 
 signature of Davitt, who was a convict at Portland, had 
 been procured, without the privity of Her Majesty's 
 Government, it would be hard to say. 
 
 The Chairman of the Land League meeting (the Rev. 
 Mr. Cantwell) made a speech, directly the manifesto had 
 been read to the assembly. His words deserve attention : 
 " The organization of the Land League will remain in its 
 "strength and in its organization, and you may as well 
 " expect to crush the Irish nation as to crush the Irish 
 " National Land League. The priesthood of Ireland is not 
 " imprisoned, and the priesthood of Ireland will ever be 
 " found, at least as a body, with the oppressed and the 
 " downtrodden of this country. The priests of Ireland 
 " were contented to bless in secret the energies and devoted- 
 " ness of their fellow-countrymen ; but if the time comes 
 " and I believe it is not far distant when it will be 
 " necessary that the organized body of the priesthood of 
 '" Ireland should show in a more determined way their fidelity
 
 464 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " to t/ie Irish people, I believe they are prepared to do so, 
 " and it will be impossible to imprison the Irish priesthood. 
 " . . . This I will say, that on the Government's head is 
 " all the blame for the complication of affairs that exists in 
 " this country now, and instead of serving the landlords and 
 " putting money in their pockets, the arrest of Mr. Parnell 
 " has placed them in a hopeless condition. . . . It is im- 
 " possible for England to continue to govern this country at 
 " all. I predict that the day is not far distant when Eng- 
 " land will cease to govern this country, and when the people 
 " themselves will not only break through these barriers of 
 " landlordism, but go on in their strength and union until 
 " we have an Irish Parliament sitting in College Green, mak- 
 " ing laws for ourselves and governing our own country ; 
 " I believe that the day is not far distant, and the complica- 
 " tion of events that has taken place is hastening on the goal 
 "as rapidly as imagination can fancy" 
 
 On the 2Oth of October, the Land League was "pro- 
 " claimed " as " an unlawful and criminal association," 
 which " had existed for some time past ; " and the people 
 were warned that " all meetings and assemblies to carry 
 " out its designs . . . would be dispersed by force." 
 Certainly this took the world by surprise ; for, while every 
 man of common sense knew the Land League to be illegal, 
 the Ministers and their party had persisted in vowing that 
 it was legal, legal when it was employed in boycotting ; 
 legal when it fanned the flames of agitation ; legal when it 
 deterred tenants from paying the rents which they had 
 covenanted to pay ; legal when it commanded the farmers 
 to " hold the harvest " ; legal when it proclaimed, through 
 the mouth of Parnell and its other leaders, that its real 
 object was separation from England. It was " legal " at 
 that time, because the agitation and terrorism suited the 
 aims of the Prime Minister, and he used the Land League 
 as his instrument for the purpose of cutting off the third 
 branch of the Upas-tree of Protestant ascendency expel- 
 ling the Protestant landlords from Ireland, and separating
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 465 
 
 it, as a Catholic country, from Protestant England. On 
 October 20, the Land League no longer served that pur- 
 pose. It was entirely swayed by Revolutionists and 
 Fenians, and was carrying Ireland, very fast, away from 
 Roman Catholicism. Therefore it was speedily "pro- 
 claimed " as illegal. 
 
 On October 2, it was " Rosary Sunday," when the priests 
 in Ireland lock their chapel doors, before the termination 
 of the mass, and go round, ledger and pencil in hand, to 
 receive the dues from every member of the congregations. 
 A tithe of each man's rent is considered the fair due. The 
 tenants had lately been told that they need not pay their 
 rents to the landlord, who held a written contract from 
 each tenant, and had the law on his side. The tenants 
 were sharp enough to question why they should pay the 
 priest, who held no contract, and had no law whereby he 
 could enforce payment. But as the priest, who does not 
 receive his voluntary dues, must be starved out, the situa- 
 tion had become sufficiently alarming. The gentleman, 
 whose correspondence has often been quoted, wrote on 
 October 24, iSSi : "I know, as a matter of fact, that 
 " there has been a considerable falling off in the revenue of 
 " the priests, in some instances fifty per cent." 
 
 By supporting the Land League, Dr. Croke and the 
 priests, as Rosary Sunday revealed, had been committing 
 suicide, like Person's pig in " The Devil's Walk" The 
 pig swam with the stream ; and as he swam, he cut his 
 throat with his paws. The priests had gone with the 
 current, and now retreated before starvation. But it was 
 too late. Ireland had become democratic. Ireland had 
 become atheist. Ireland had had its cupidity and its 
 worst passions aroused by the Archbishop and the priests 
 themselves. Per qua peccat homo, per h<zc et torquetur. 
 
 H II
 
 466 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. LXVII. 
 
 LET us enter the Land Court in Ireland. On October 20 
 Mr. Justice O'Hagan is to make his opening address in 
 the Land Court. The registrar, in opening the court, an- 
 nounces it by mistake, or of malice prepense, as the "Court 
 "of the Land League," at which there is a cachinnatory buzz. 
 Justice O'Hagan then makes a long speech to explain the 
 duties of his tribunal, saying that the end and aim which 
 they would keep before them, in their judgments, would 
 be to enable the tenants to " live and thrive." It was well 
 said, by some one present, that " it is a Court for the ad- 
 " ministration of relief to indolent and indigent farmers, at 
 " the expense of their impoverished landlords." 
 
 The words of the Chief Commissioner were sufficient to 
 induce tenants, by thousands, to rush into the Land Court ; 
 but the actual interpretation put upon those words, by the 
 Sub-commissioners, showed how communistic was the 
 meaning they attached to them. A railway porter of 
 Manchester applied to the Land Court at Belfast. His 
 name was M'Atavey. He had recently refused an offer 
 of 150 for the mere tenant-right of his farm. That is to 
 say, he valued the margin of profit, beyond the outgoings 
 and rent, for the remainder of his lease, at more than 
 150. This fact was used, by his own solicitors, on Octo- 
 ber 25, 1881, when writing, in another case, to prove that 
 his rent was low, and that it was " the rent usually de- 
 " manded on this and other estates in the neighbourhood. 
 " for such farms as that which he occupied." 1 On October 
 30, these solicitors again wrote to the chairman of the Man- 
 chester railway : " The charge of Mr. Justice O'Hagan has 
 " thrown upon him (O'Hagan) the duty of seeing that 
 " M'Atavey's present occupation, as a cultivator of land 
 " is made sufficiently remunerative ; and he cannot help 
 " thinking that a like duty devolves morally upon your 
 1 St. James's Gazette.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 467 
 
 "directors in respect of M'Atavey's other present occu- 
 " pation, as railway porter." 
 
 Here was a man who certainly held some land, of 
 which he had made little use ; and who gained his liveli- 
 hood as a railway porter. The charge of O'Hagan raised 
 his cupidity and fanned his hopes. He was to get twice 
 as much as was "sufficiently remunerative." Through 
 neglect of the land, he could well feign a difficulty of 
 living upon his holding; and he could apply O'Hagan's 
 charge to himself, and demand that the Commissioners 
 should enable him to "live and thrive" bn his holding. 
 That he should gain a livelihood from other sources, was 
 past the question ; it was on his holding that he was to 
 live and thrive. A land surveyor who had, the previous 
 year, valued his farm at much more than he paid, now 
 swore that it was worth only three-fourths of that 
 amount. The rent of his farm was therefore reduced by 
 twenty- five per cent 
 
 It is not so much the things which are done which 
 frighten us, as the opinions (miscalled " principles ") on 
 which those acts are based. Commissioner Baldwin, in 
 judging M'Atavey's case, said : " In determining the rent, 
 " we have not set up any standard of what the farming 
 " ought to be. We have taken the estate, tenants and all, 
 " as we found them. We have carefully considered the 
 "capabilities of the land in the hands of the present 
 " tenants. To others the land may be more valuable, if 
 " those tenants were removed. With any speculation as 
 " to that point, we have nothing to do." It follows that, 
 in proportion as a tenant is more idle, more slothful, more 
 given to drinking bouts, more improvident, or more ignor- 
 .ant of farming and neglectful of his land, the more will his 
 rents be reduced, to enable him to live and thrive on his 
 holding, without changing his evil mode of life ; and the 
 more dearly will the landlord have to pay for the tenant's 
 vice. 
 
 As the tenants were not compelled to pay any rent
 
 468 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 pending the decisions on their cases, and as there were so 
 many thousands of cases blocking the Courts that it must 
 be many years before they could be disposed of, the 
 tenant was enabled to put on the screw, and say to his 
 landlord : " Reduce my rent by thirty-three per cent, now, 
 " and I will pay that rent ; or wait until the Commissioners 
 "adjudicate the case, and you will get no rent in the 
 " meanwhile." Either way, the landlord was certain to be 
 robbed to a serious extent, and probably utterly ruined. 
 Of course the tenants, pending the adjudications of their 
 cases, did as little good farming as possible, so as to obtain 
 the greater reductions. The Irish farmers were indeed 
 quick-witted enough to see this beforehand. So Commis- 
 sioner Professor Baldwin said : " Many of the farms were 
 neglected, and a few in a shameful state." 1 
 
 o ' 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain, the President of the Board of Trade, 
 went to Liverpool on the 26th of October, to deliver him- 
 self of an oration. He admitted that the Government had 
 not suppressed, if not fostered, the Land League agitation, 
 in order that the two Houses, Commons and Lords, might 
 be coerced into passing the Land Law. He declared that 
 this was the right policy to pursue ; and he maintained 
 that the Land League had been organized for just and 
 commendable objects : If the Land League had dis- 
 countenanced " violence and intimidation " (which they 
 encouraged, the whole time that the Government encour- 
 aged the agitation), "then there was no agitation in the 
 " United Kingdom more deserving of complete sympathy, 
 " and more entitled to success." Again : " Its original 
 "objects, as I have said, were legal, and even praise- 
 " worthy." Again : " To have stifled the agitation at such 
 " a time (before the passing of the Land Act) would 
 " have been to have prevented Reform." Again : " If the 
 " agitation of the Land League had been suppressed, the 
 " tenants of Ireland would have had no organization to 
 " fall back upon." Finally : " It is, of course, no secret 
 1 St. James's Gazette, Nov., 1881.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 469 
 
 " that there have been, in the minds of the leaders of the 
 "agitation, other objects of a totally different character; 
 " but so long as they pursued their avowed objects, they 
 " were perfectly in the right" Here a member of the 
 Government admitted that the ultimate end and aim of 
 the Land League was bad, separation of Ireland from 
 England ; and that the means employed, namely, violence, 
 intimidation, murder, outrage, arson, etc., were criminal ; 
 and yet he also admitted that the Government had 
 encouraged the Land League and fomented the agitation. 
 He himself said that, when the Government introduced 
 the Coercion Act, the Land League were : " permitting 
 "if not countenancing, acts of outrage and a system of 
 " secret terrorism, which no civilized Government can be 
 "expected to endure." Yet the Government not only 
 did endure it, not only did the Government lay aside, 
 unused, the additional powers which Parliament had just 
 conferred upon them ; but they even fostered the Land 
 League and countenanced its agitation ; or, as Mr. 
 Chamberlain euphemiously styled this intentional want 
 of action on the part of the Government, they put the 
 Coercion Act " sparingly and reluctantly in operation." 
 
 This "secret terrorism," of which Mr. Chamberlain 
 accused the Land League, had shortly before been illus- 
 trated by the testimony of an eye-witness. 1 "The times 
 are terrible to live in. There is a deep under-current of 
 " hatred to England running through the country ; and there 
 "the real danger lies. Landed gentry, civic authorities, 
 " even officials in Government offices, share it. . . . I 
 " learn that throughout the country a secret detective police 
 "exists, organized by the Land League, for domestic 
 "espionage. Servants and employe's of all sorts are 
 " enrolled among its ranks, and I learn the priest is often 
 " the recipient of their reports. Under these circumstances, 
 " freedom of speech is no longer possible." 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain seems always to start from an entirely 
 l St. James's Gazette^ Oct. 21.
 
 470 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 false maxim. He holds that it is not the first duty of a 
 Government to govern ; not even their duty to maintain 
 rights, and to protect persons and property ; but that 
 their office is to discover real or imaginary defects in the 
 laws, and to tinker the Acts of Parliament into grotesque 
 shapes pleasing to the newest agitators. This is an utterly 
 false view. Legislation consists only in the application of 
 eternal laws to the details of fleeting circumstances. In 
 former days the fear was entertained lest the people 
 should urge their representatives into wild and uncon- 
 sidered measures ; and the various checks of the Consti- 
 tution were devised to prevent such a catastrophe from 
 occurring. Now we have to fear lest every day should 
 witness the astounding fact of people and representatives 
 being coerced, by a Ministry and the agitation which they 
 foment, into wild theories of legislation and unjust acts of 
 confiscation ! 
 
 The objects of the Government having been obtained, 
 by means of the Land League, as far as that could serve 
 them, the Land League was thrown over ; and Mr. 
 Gladstone, speaking at Knowsley, about the same time as 
 Mr. Chamberlain spoke at Liverpool, thus described his 
 former allies of the Land League : l " The question pre- 
 " sented to us is whether Ireland is to be governed under 
 " laws made by a free and regularly chosen Parliament, or 
 " whether it is to be governed under laws known to nobody, 
 " written nowhere, except in the brains of a few individuals, 
 " and enforced by an illegal, arbitrary, self-appointed asso- 
 " ciation. . . . Well, the immediate object which is 
 " proposed is rapine, I don't call it by any other name 
 " . . . this is sheer rapine. The doctrine is that there is 
 " a rental of .17,000,000 in Ireland, and that, of that rental, 
 " only between two and three millions ought to be paid. 
 " How is this rapine to be carried into effect f By intimida- 
 " tion sheer intimidation in three forms danger to life, 
 " destruction of property, and, thirdly, ruin through the 
 1 Times > Oct. 28.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 471 
 
 " withdrawal of employment. Within the last twelve 
 " months there has grown up in Ireland a system which is 
 " called ' Boycotting.' . . . Thus, gentlemen, it is simply 
 " ruin for all those who decline to obey the doctrines of 
 " the Land League. The ferocity, I may say the cruelty, 
 "with which the thing is pushed to its remotest consequences 
 '' is hardly credible. . . . Formidable machinery has been 
 "put in motion to compel everybody to acquiesce in the corrupt 
 " and demoralizing doctrine of rapine. . . . Rapine is 
 " the first object ; but rapine is not the only object. It is 
 "perfectly true that these gentlemen wish to march through 
 " rapine to disintegration and dismemberment of the Empire, 
 " and, I am sorry to say, even to the placing of different parts 
 " of the Empire in direct hostility one with the other. That 
 " is the issue in which we are engaged" 
 
 What follows logically from these words of Mr. Glad- 
 stone ? Is it not that, in favouring the Land League agita- 
 tion which he did in order to impose a Bill on Parlia- 
 ment Mr. Gladstone permitted an intolerable tyranny, 
 hated by all Ireland ? This was brought about, in his 
 endeavour to coerce Parliament, with the extirpation of 
 Protestant landlords, in order that the third branch of the 
 " Upas-tree of Protestant ascendency " should be lopped 
 off. To compass this end, he allied himself with those 
 who desired the separation of Ireland from England. 
 
 The Land Act, in itself, was doubtless a charter of 
 Communism. Mr. Gladstone had stated, in the House, that 
 the great majority of landowners in Ireland had done their 
 duty ; and that, as most of the rents of Ireland were very 
 low, the numbers of tenants who would be able to claim 
 under the Land Act would be extremely small. Mr. 
 Chamberlain supported his chief in asserting that the 
 landlords, on the whole, had been very indulgent to their 
 tenants. Yet thousands and thousands of applications 
 poured in from all parts of Ireland ! If, then, Mr. Glad- 
 stone spoke truly, and with knowledge, the landlords, in 
 the vast majority of those cases, must have had the right
 
 472 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 on their side. Yet the Commissioners decided the cases 
 offhand, making reductions in the rents of thirty-three per 
 cent. Was that not sheer Communism ? 
 
 A good illustration was furnished 1 by the letter of a 
 Roman Catholic member of Parliament, one of the chief 
 followers of Mr. Parnell, Mr. Frank Hugh O'Donnell. 
 He dated from "the Irish Parliamentary Offices, West- 
 " minster." " What, I ask, is the substantial difference 
 " between the doctrine of Mr. Parnell at Wexford and the 
 " doctrine of the Land Commissioners at Belfast ? Again, 
 "sir, I venture to say that within a few days the Land 
 " Court will be absolutely blocked by applications to re- 
 " duce rents on the splendid terms which the Land Court is 
 "offering to the tenantry, and which are rousing all Ireland 
 " like a trumpet-call. . . . Even doubling the judicial 
 "staff will not meet the crush. The decisions at Castle 
 " Blayney and Belfast will precipitate the most sluggish ima- 
 "ginations upon the enticing offers of the Court. Unless the 
 "Commissioners are to abandon all pretence of careful 
 "investigation, unless the Commissioners are to decide 
 "cases by the simple toss of a convenient coin, there is 
 "judicial occupation for generations of Land Commis- 
 " sioners in the contending plaints of the Irish landowners 
 " and the 600,000 tenants who require reductions of rent." 
 
 A few days afterwards, Mr. O'Donnell wrote another 
 letter: 2 "So long as the Land Commission continues 
 " to reduce rents in Ulster even by twenty-five and 
 " thirty-five per cent., and in the south by vastly larger 
 " amounts, surely Mr. Gladstone must know, that it could 
 " be no part of the policy of the Land League to prevent 
 " operations which must abolish landlordism within a short 
 " time all over Ireland. . . . Who could at once assume 
 " that a legislative measure ' which was to leave rents practi- 
 "'ca/fy untouched' was in reality to reduce them from thirty 
 " to fifty per cent.?' 
 
 1 Times, Nov. 3. 2 Nov. n.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 473 
 
 No. LXVIII. 
 
 THE tenant who, under the Act, appealed to the Com- 
 missioners against his rent as excessive, could not be 
 evicted, and no distraint could be issued ; and therefore of 
 course he paid no rent, until his case had been decided. 
 That was the Gladstone policy. The policy of Mr. Glad- 
 stone, of Dr. Nulty (Bishop of Meath), and of the Land 
 League was simply and absolutely to pay no rent. There- 
 fore their policy was, to ruin the landlords of Ireland. At 
 the very beginning of November, the Land League issued 
 a manifesto to the people of Ireland, signed by Patrick 
 Egan, the treasurer, in which they said, in reference to the 
 Lord Lieutenant's proclamation of the Land League : " The 
 " Government of England has declared war against the 
 " Irish people. The organization that protected them 
 " against the ravages of landlordism has been declared 
 " ' unlawful and criminal.' A reign of terror has com- 
 "menced. Meet the action of the English Government 
 "with a determined passive resistance. The ''No-rent 1 
 " banner has been raised, and it remains with the people 
 " now to prove themselves dastards or men. Pay no rent. 
 " Avoid the Land Court. Such is the programme before 
 "the country. Adopt it, and it will lead you to free land 
 " and happy homes. Reject it, and slavery and degrada- 
 " tion will be your portion. Pay no rent. The person who 
 " does, should be visited with the severest sentence of social 
 " ostracism. Avoid the Land Court. Cast out the person 
 " who enters it as a renegade to his country and to the 
 " cause of his fellow-men. Hold the harvest, is the ivatch- 
 "word. To do that effectually you should as far as 
 " possible turn it into money. Sell your stock when such 
 " a course will not entail a loss. Make a friendly arrange- 
 " ment with your creditors about your interests in your 
 " farms. A short and sharp struggle now, and the vilest
 
 474 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "oppression that ever afflicted humanity will be wiped 
 " away. No rent. Your brethren in America have risen 
 " to the crisis, and are ready to supply you with unlimited 
 " funds, provided you maintain your attitude of passive 
 "resistance and pay no rent. No rent. The tenants of 
 " Ireland have still one tremendous move in their power, 
 " and that is to quietly stay at home and pay no rent. I 
 " believe that if they unitedly adopted a policy of passive 
 " resistance, which I do not see how it woiild be possible for 
 " tJie landlords to combat, it would lead to one of the greatest 
 " revolutions that Ireland has ever known. Pay no rent. 
 " By order. " PATRICK EGAN, Treasurer." 
 
 In comparison with this manifesto, it is well to refer to 
 the speech of Mr. Gladstone at the Mansion House, on 
 Nov. 9 : " I hold in my hand, my Lord Mayor, a very 
 " short and simple if significant proof of the treatment to 
 " which the people of Ireland have been subjected by those 
 " who call themselves their friends. It is a notice emana- 
 " ting from high authority, and is couched in these terms : 
 " ' Any person paying his rent before Parnell and the other 
 '" prisoners are liberated, without the sanction of the Land 
 " ' League, will be " Boycotted." ' I need not, my Lord 
 " Mayor, expound to you in detail the meaning of that 
 " phrase ; but this I will say, that its mildest significance 
 " is the total ruin of the livelihood of the man against whom 
 " its machinery is directed." 
 
 The mildest conclusion to which any man can have 
 arrived, on hearing the speech, would have been that " Mr. 
 " Gladstone was a failure." But if his object was to lop off 
 that branch of Protestant ascendency, which he hated, then 
 the result had been a bright promise of success. Which was 
 Mr. Gladstone a failure, or a success ? It was a curious 
 fact that the Roman Catholic organ of Paris, Le Monde, 
 on October 23, predicted, or at least, announced before- 
 hand the future policy of the Land League, in urging the 
 people to pay no rent. It said : " If the resistance is
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 475 
 
 ''passive, if the farmers give the authorities no pretext for 
 " repression, they may place England in a singular and 
 " terrible embarrassment; for, driven with their families from 
 " their homes, they are doomed either to starve or to live 
 " on the subscriptions they will receive from their American 
 " countrymen. In the former case, for hundreds of thou- 
 " sands of people to die of hunger on the Queen's soil. 
 " would be too revolting ; and in the second case, for hun- 
 " dreds of thousands of Irish to be supported in Ireland with 
 "American money and with no occupation, would be too 
 " dangerous." 
 
 The Republique Franqaise, on the same day, spoke of 
 the Land Act as "the great Socialist Law." On this 
 text Lord Salisbury enlarged in a speech on Nov. 13: 
 " It naturally occurs to all of us to ask, why these measures 
 "of rigour have been delayed so long? Why has the 
 " plant of disaffection been allowed to grow so high ? Why 
 " has the epidemic been allowed to cover so large an area 
 " of the country ? And the answer that you receive, shows 
 " the intense conviction in the minds of the Liberal leaders, 
 " that landlords, and the sufferings of landlords, are matters 
 " which no reasonable person ought to regard, because they 
 " take it as a credit to themselves, and as a proof of their 
 "tender and amiable dispositions, that they did not a year 
 " ago, when the state of things was precisely similar to 
 " what it is now they did not adopt the measures which 
 " are thought necessary now. ... All those things, so far 
 " as they are prevented now, might have been prevented a 
 " year ago, and the Government have nothing to advance 
 " to defend themselves in not having applied the remedy 
 " sooner, except that it is the proof of a kind and sympa- 
 " thetic and constitutional disposition not to prevent people 
 "from murdering landlords, until you are absolutely obliged 
 " to do so. ... The Irish people see that Mr. Gladstone 
 "and Mr. Parnell have both been occupied for some time past 
 ' in recommending the conveyance or subtraction of a certain 
 "portion of the property of Irish landlords to somebody else.
 
 476 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "... You may, in pursuit of the objects of public policy, 
 " find it necessary to divest one man of his property, and 
 " to hand that property to another. If you do so, you are 
 "bound to give him compensation; . . . and if you do 
 " that without compensation, disguise it by what sophistries 
 "you please, you commit nothing else but an act of public 
 "plunder:' 
 
 Lord Salisbury further said, with reference to the com- 
 plicity between Mr. Gladstone's Government and Mr. 
 Parnell : " Mr. Chamberlain said, if I remember the words 
 " aright, that to stifle the agitation last autumn would 
 " have been to have prevented the passing of measures 
 "of relief. It seems to me that Mr. Chamberlain might 
 " not unreasonably be supposed to have kept alive the 
 " agitation of last autumn in order to pass those measures 
 " of reform. The future historian may perhaps take this 
 "as a strong and true explanation of the action of Her 
 " Majesty's Government." Nor was the complicity limited 
 to the ruin of Protestant landlords. The journals of 
 Nov. 5 revealed to us the opinion of Dr. Croke, Romanist 
 Archbishop of Cashel; as to the measures of supposed 
 repression which Mr. Gladstone had taken, so as to wake 
 up the Land League, from its slumbers. He enabled us 
 to judge the secret aims which Mr. Gladstone entertained. 
 Dr. Croke took for his text the great changes which had 
 lately come over Ireland, and he said : " But there is one 
 " thing that has not changed since then. The spirit of 
 " the country, though fiercely assailed, has not been broken 
 " or even impaired ; the determination of the people to win 
 " their rights has not been shaken, but; rather strengthened^ 
 " on the contrary, and consolidated by the very pressure by 
 " which it was sought to be subdued ; and the great organi- 
 " zation which has achieved such wondrous results both in 
 " educating and uniting the people, though proscribed and 
 " supposed to be annihilated, will, I predict, yet arise from 
 "its ashes like the fabled bird that we read of, and give 
 "proof in reality that it was not dead, but only sleeping.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 477 
 
 " I have just said that there was one thing which has 
 " undergone no change the spirit, namely, of the people. 
 " There is one man also who has undergone no change, and 
 " that man is myself. My views are not unknown to you. I 
 " have proclaimed and published them on many a platform 
 " in Tipperary. . . . Keep for yourselves what of right 
 " belongs to you. Tender a fair rent to them to whom it is 
 "due. If accepted, well and good ; if not, you Iiave in so 
 "far done your dtity, and be the consequences of refusal on 
 " other heads than yours" 
 
 " Tender a fair rent," and that is all that can be required 
 of you ! But who was to determine what was a fair rent ? 
 The tenant himself, according to Dr. Croke. " How much 
 " owest thou to my lord ? " "A hundred talents." " Take 
 " thy lease, and write in it, fifty." So suggested the unjust 
 steward. Was Dr. Croke an unjust steward ? Or was he 
 dancing to Gladstone's piping ? Why should he so soon 
 have retracted his former condemnation of the authors 
 of the "no rent manifesto"? Why should the Land 
 Leaguers, whom he so lately denounced, have become 
 again " the trusted leaders of the people, who have been 
 " clutched by the salaried supporters of law and order, and 
 "thrust into prison"? Why should he have spoken 
 flatteringly of their "great organization which has achieved 
 " such wondrous results, both in educating and uniting the 
 "people," and which, by his archiepiscopal power and 
 authority, he declared to be "not dead, but sleeping"? 
 Why should he have praised "the determination of the 
 people to win " their rights," which had been " strengthened 
 "and consolidated" by putting Parnell and the Council of 
 the Land League safely in one prison ? Why should he 
 have ignored his former retractation, and proclaimed him- 
 self, like Julius Caesar, as " the northern star, of whose true 
 " fixed and resting quality there is no fellow in the firma- 
 " ment," as the " one man that has undergone no change " ? 
 Why was it ? The answer was not far to seek. It may be 
 that Archbishop Croke had before promoted the agitation
 
 478 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 for Mr. Gladstone, in order to pass the Land Act ; and that 
 he then promoted it for another Gladstonian end. This 
 it was. On Nov. I, 1881, we learned, through the Times, 
 that Mr. Errington, M.P., had been sent to Rome to 
 establish diplomatic communication between the British 
 Government and the Vatican, so that His Holiness might 
 promote peace between the British Government and the Irish 
 people. We learned, too, that Consul White had arrived 
 in Rome, and been received, in private audience, by Pope 
 Leo XIII. " The conduct of a part of the Roman Catholic 
 "clergy in Ireland, during the last two years, necessitated 
 " the presence in Rome of a British representative." 
 
 The Land Act, so far from stilling the excitement, was 
 as the taste of blood to a young tiger who had been 
 fondled and brought up on milk. The Times affirmed, on 
 November 28, that the refusal to pay rent had been no 
 way lessened, but increased and exacerbated by the 
 operation of the Act. It added : " The refusal to pay does 
 " not in all cases arise either from terrorism, although that 
 " operates upon many of them, or from actual dishonesty ; 
 " but the action of tJie Land Court has placed an additional 
 11 difficulty in the way of the landlords, so far as the south 
 "is concerned. The tenants have been watching the re- 
 " ductions which the Sub-commisioners have made in the 
 "north and west, where the circumstances are wholly 
 " different, and, taking the low levels at which rents have 
 "been fixed, they make the most unreasonable demands to 
 " have their own rents fixed upon a similar scale, and the 
 " landlords have no alternative but to submit to spoliation if 
 "they are in actual want of means, or to resort to the 
 " remedies of the law. While the tenants in the south are 
 "using the judgments of the Sub-commissioners in other 
 " places in this way, they are keeping out of the Land 
 " Court. Not three per cent, of the tenantry of the southern 
 " counties have applied to have fair rents fixed, but they 
 " put forward extravagant demands, and doggedly refuse 
 " to come to any terms but their own. In some cases
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 479 
 
 "where the land is good and the tenants are comfortable 
 "they have required that all arrears up to 1881 should be 
 "written off, and an abatement of 25 per cent made upon 
 " the balance. This would be equivalent to a sacrifice of 
 "from 50 to 75 per cent." 
 
 Further, the same witness of the Government side bore 
 testimony that the landlords " have not only to meet Sub- 
 " commissioners administering a law which was levelled 
 " against them (the landlords), and has been rendered more 
 "destructive than its promoters professed to intend, but 
 " they have the tenants banded against them and prepared 
 " to give evidence to serve their own interests, while on 
 " their side few valuers can be found with sufficient courage 
 " to face the odium and personal danger which they would 
 " incur by giving testimony against the tenants. Some of 
 ' the witnesses who gave evidence in the court were threat- 
 "ened when they left the court-house, and in the south, the 
 " most competent judges of the value of property dare not 
 " come forward, because it would be ruinous to their pro- 
 fessional interests. What chance of full, impartial justice 
 "have the owners of property under such circumstances? 
 " Some of the Sub-commissioners are well-qualified to form 
 " a fair rough-and-ready estimate, but as they are tenant- 
 -farmers themselves, and many have land not many miles 
 " from their sphere of duty, their sympathies and interests 
 " will naturally be with those who want to bring down the 
 " rent." 
 
 As to the valuations and "inspections" of tenements, 
 obtained by the Sub-commissioners, we were told of farms 
 of 500 acres which were inspected in two-and-a-half hours ; 
 and the result of those cursory inspections outweighed, in 
 the Sub-commissioners' estimation, the careful valuations by 
 experts on the part of the landlords, to which a day and 
 a half had been devoted. 1 
 
 There were strange contradictions between the state- 
 ments of the Government as to the effects which the Land 
 1 See also Times of December 20.
 
 480 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Act would have, by which they succeeded in procuring its 
 acceptance, and the actual effects which have been mani- 
 fested in the working of it Was it that the Government 
 did not know what they were doing ? They never con- 
 fessed their error and incompetence ; they never endea- 
 voured to remedy and make amends for the evil which 
 they wrought. If they had been directors of a company, 
 we should have had them all up before the Lord Mayor 
 for fraudulent statements in the prospectus. If they had 
 been professed Jesuits, we should have recognised in them 
 the licence of their casuistry. Rents, whether above 
 Griffith's valuation, or below it, were everywhere, and in all 
 cases, reduced, according to the mere whim or fancy of the 
 Sub-commissioner, who sat as judge, and who had himself 
 been taken from the ranks of the Land Leaguers. The 
 fact that rents, on a property, had not been raised within 
 living memory, served nought ; for in every case a re- 
 duction was made, in order to put the tenant in the right 
 and throw the costs on the landlord. Incomes were 
 mowed down and lopped by 25 per cent, and in some 
 cases by 80 per cent. The first return, up to January 28, 
 1882, made by the Government, showed that the average 
 reduction of rents in Leinster was 2r6 ; in Munster, 23^3 ; 
 in Ulster, 24*4 ; and in Connaught, 28'5 per cent How did 
 that tally with the statements of the Government when 
 persuading Parliament to accept the Act? 
 
 The Lord Chancellor x is reported as saying : " I deny 
 " that the Bill will in any degree whatever diminish the 
 "rights of the landlord or the value of the interest he 
 " possesses ; " while Lord Carlingford z says : " My lords, 
 ' I maintain that the provisions of this Bill will cause the 
 " landlords no money loss whatever. I believe it will inflict 
 "upon them no loss of income, except in those cases in 
 " which a certain number of landlords may have imposed 
 " upon their tenants excessive and inequitable rents, which 
 " they are probably vainly trying to recover." 
 
 1 " Hansard," vol. cclxiv., p. 532. Ibid., p. 252.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 481 
 
 In reviewing the decisions of the Sub-commissioners, 
 before the issue of that return, on December 20, 1881, the 
 Times remarked : " There is a substantial similarity in the 
 "results, which has led them to infer that some definite 
 "principle has been laid down. The fact was admitted at 
 " Downpatrick on Thursday (December 15) by one of the 
 " Commissioners, who stated that before they entered upon 
 " their duties, the principles upon which they were to act had 
 " been settled, and they had not departed one jot from them. . . . 
 " The impression deepens every day that the decisions are 
 " in substantial harmony with such viezvs as those of Mr. 
 " Healy, and that the Sub-commissioners are going upon 
 " some invisible but well understood lines." 
 
 The Commissioner who made that statement "in the 
 " presence of his colleagues," put it in even more suggestive 
 language, by saying that they "determined the fair-rent 
 "before setting feet on a sod of land." They did so 
 according to an " invisible but well understood " principle. 
 What was it ? I will tell you. It is, indeed, easily guessed. 
 The end which Mr. Gladstone set before himself, was to 
 lop off " tJie three branches of the Upas-tree of Protestant 
 " ascendency." One of the branches (he said) was Land- 
 lordism. His end dictated the means. It was remarkable 
 that the same page of the Times, of December 20, informed 
 us that the Fenian movement was daily " gaining strength 
 " and courage " ; and that " the agitation carried on by the 
 " League, while reviving and developing Fenianism, has 
 " been served and stimulated in return. The two forces act 
 " and react upon each other, and co-operate in working out 
 " the same revolutionary ends." One of those revolutionary 
 ends was the separation of Ireland from England, and 
 its complete independence as a Roman Catholic State. The 
 destruction of the Protestant Church, the ruin of the Pro- 
 testant landlords, and the Romanist education of children 
 and youths, were the means to that end. According to 
 the Romanist Freemans Journal, of Dublin, 1 Dr. Croke 
 
 1 January n, 1882. 
 
 I I
 
 482 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 told Davitt that the Land Act would destroy Landlordism. 
 The letter from Mr. Shaw, M.P., the late leader of the 
 Home Rule party, to the secretary of the Home Rule 
 League, will serve to throw a side-light on the whole 
 proceeding : l " The Federal plan, as adopted by the 
 "conference of 1873, was a compromise. It was be- 
 " lieved in by many, by others accepted as a fair mode 
 " of meeting a great difficulty ; and, while they did not 
 "believe in it in the abstract, they honestly and loyally 
 " intended to work for it, and, if they obtained it, to give 
 " it a fair trial. But there were others, and among them 
 " active and influential men, who joined the association 
 "with the view of using it as a means of working out 
 " much more extreme ends, and even before Mr. Butt's 
 " death, it was evident that these gentlemen had acquired 
 " complete ascendency in its councils. Of the two parties of 
 "which the League is composed, the one is loyal to its 
 " original principles, and desires to obtain self-government 
 " for our country within the Constitution and by constitu- 
 " tional means. The other plainly states that ' the country 
 " ' has outgrown the programme of the League,' that ' the 
 " ' foundations have been firmly laid of an Irish Republic' " 
 He then ventured, without knowing the real ends of the 
 intrigue, to give a little advice, which had often been given 
 before, and never attended to: "A public man should speak 
 " nothing to the Irish people except what he thoroughly 
 " and heartily believes. I believe the movement wJiich, if 
 " language means anything, means separation must end in 
 "fearftil disaster to the Irish people" 
 
 No. LXIX. 
 
 THE Jesuit organ, the Union, of Paris, on December 26, 
 1881, informed its readers that the landowners had "set 
 " the example of contempt for the laws, and of indulging 
 " in violent language " ; that the landlords did not like 
 1 Times ; December 24.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 483 
 
 " to see their privileges curtailed, particularly the absolute 
 "power they exercised on their estates": and "we also 
 "know that they have tyrannized over the unfortunate 
 "population of Ireland. Roman law defines property as 
 "jus utiet abuti; but that right has its limits, and theyky 
 " abuti must not supersede the jus uti, as has been seen in 
 " Ireland for centuries." Let us not say, with Hamlet, that 
 this farrago was, " Words, words, words ! " for it would be 
 more correct to designate it as, "Lies, lies, lies!" The 
 Rttwblique Fran$aise, of the same day, acknowledged that 
 the effect of the Land Act must be the ruin of a large 
 number of landowners. It added that, by "the refusal 
 "of farmers to pay their rents, by boycotting, etc.," the 
 position of the landlords " is no less critical than that of 
 "their tenants." The French organs had been before 
 instructed to paint the condition of Irish farmers as so 
 intolerable, that the Land Act, for the spoliation of land- 
 lords, was justifiable. They now observed that the posi- 
 tion of the landlords was equally intolerable. But they 
 failed to proceed to the logical conclusion. They could 
 not discover, in their consciousness, the maxim : parium, 
 par est ratio. 
 
 As an antidote to the intellectual poison which had 
 been distilled in the cloister, and then instilled by the 
 organs of the press, let us recall the words of Mr. Glad- 
 stone himself, when introducing the Land Bill to the notice 
 of the House of Commons on April 7, 1881 : "The 
 land laws of England are laws under which, at any 
 " rate, this country has lived, has remained contented, and 
 " has made extraordinary progress ; but the land laws 
 "of Ireland chiefly differ from the land laws of England, 
 " in the very special provision which they present to us 
 "in behalf of the tenant" He then quoted from the Bess- 
 borough Commission : " It was unusual in Ireland to exact 
 "wJiat in England would be considered a full or fair com- 
 " mercial rent. . . . This . . . is to the present day 
 " the rule rather than the exception in Ireland." Again
 
 484 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 the Prime Minister said : " Neither should we think it just 
 " to propose legislation on this matter on the ground, 
 " whether expressed or implied, of general misconduct on 
 " the part of the Irish landlords ; on the contrary, as a rule 
 " they Jiave stood their trial \ and as a rule they have been 
 " acquitted" 
 
 The ground was thus cut from under the feet of the 
 intriguers. They could not, for a time at least, defend the 
 Land Act, and continue hacking at the third branch of the 
 Upas-tree, under excuse of the supposed tyranny and in- 
 justice of the landlords. Therefore it was that, during the 
 Christmas week, 1 the Roman Catholic priests in Ireland 
 were busy distributing the following extraordinary docu- 
 ment : 
 
 " LAND THE COMMON PROPERTY OF ALL. 
 
 " From the Most Rev. Dr. Nulty's letter to the clergy 
 and laity of the diocese of Meath, 1881. 
 
 " The land of every country is the common property of 
 the people of that country, because its real owner the 
 Creator who made it has transferred it as a voluntary 
 gift to them. Terrain autem dedit filiis Jiominum. (The 
 earth He hath given to the children of men.) Now, as 
 every individual, in every country, is a creature and a child 
 of God, and as all His creatures are equal in His sight, 
 any settlement of the land of this or any other country that 
 would exclude the humblest man in this or that country from 
 his share of tJie common inheritance would not only be an 
 injustice and a wrong to that man, but would, moreover, 
 be an impious resistance to the benevolent intentions of his 
 Creator. 
 
 " THOMAS NULTY, Bishop of Meath." 
 
 For the ignorant populace of Ireland, the above words, 
 circulated by Irish priests and with the weight of an Irish 
 1 Times, Dec. 27, 1881.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 485 
 
 bishop's name, were certainly most dangerous. Must not 
 every Celt have seen in them the assertion of the revo- 
 lutionary doctrine of "Equality"? Must they not have 
 taken them as an authoritative declaration of the truth 
 of Communistic principles ? What tenant farmer would 
 perceive the bad logic, and thenon sequiturth&y contained ? 
 Terrain dedit filiis hominum. He gave the earth to sons 
 of men, ergo, every individual on the earth has a right to 
 his share! Who, again, would detect the contradictio 
 principii f Every man has a right to a share of the com- 
 mon inheritance. How can there be private owners of a 
 common property ? Dr. Nulty, arrogating to himself the 
 infallible authority which he ascribed alone to the Pope, 
 and to him only when teaching ex cathedra, on morals or 
 faith, defined a defence of rights to be " an impious re- 
 " sistance " to the will of the Creator ! Dr. Nulty was 
 propping up the secret agencies which were so busily at 
 work in Ireland. A letter from Ireland, under date of 
 Dec. 30, 1881, informed me that "Dr. Nulty was anxious 
 " to fill, with the mob, the position vacated by Dr. Croke." 
 Dr. Croke, the Archbishop of Cashel, did not ultimately 
 vacate that position ; but, for a time only, he apparently 
 resigned the leadership of the Nationalists and Fenians. 
 For the same reason, the very Rev. Dean Quirk, on Jan. 8, 
 1882, denounced, from the High Altar of Archbishop 
 Croke's Cathedral, the system of outrages and tyranny 
 which was being practised in Ireland, and warned his con- 
 gregation of their duty to obey the laws of the land. 
 
 But what were those secret agencies ? I do not refer to 
 the primum mobile. I do not speak of the General 
 Authority, who, from his cell, directs and "moves the 
 " world." I allude to the secundum mobile movens. The 
 Times of Jan. 2, 1882, reported that : " the demoralized state 
 " of the country is but imperfectly indicated in the reports of 
 " crime and outrage. There are secret springs of evil at work 
 " which are very difficult to trace, but their influence is shown 
 " in the quiet but effective organization against the payment
 
 486 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " of rent. . . . Recent events have thrown some rays of 
 " light upon the dark conspiracies which, since tJie Land 
 " League, which covered them, has been removed as a visible 
 " system, are now brought nearer to the surface. It has been 
 " asserted by political theorists that the Fenian and other 
 " secret societies have been formed since the suppression of 
 " the League, and are the natural result of that measure. 
 " They forget that the League was founded upon Fenianism, 
 " and that if it had not received the support of Fenians in its 
 " early stages, it would have utterly failed. Davitt, who started 
 " the movement, is a convicted Fenian, and the first meetings 
 " were attended almost exclusively by movable bands of Fenians, 
 " who were concentrated iipon the various points where demon- 
 " strations were to be held. After the failure of the Fenian 
 "outbreak the conspiracy was to a great extent shattered, 
 but the remnants of it remained, and the Land League 
 " agitation developed its latent power, and brought the scat- 
 tered forces together again. The new form and pro- 
 " gramme were not quite accepted by the whole body, and 
 " the Southern Fenians held aloof. There were even open 
 " feuds between the extreme Nationalists or Fenians and the 
 " Land Leaguers ; but when the League became strong, 
 " through the terrorism which the secret auxiliaries inspired, 
 "and the flow of money from America, which is the base 
 " of operations for every revolutionary enterprise, the breach 
 " was healed, the ranks were closed, and the return of Mr. 
 " Parnell for Cork cemented the union between the different 
 "parties. These secret agencies play an important part in the 
 "social disorganization of the country, and the conspiracy 
 " against the payment of rent is enforced by them." 
 
 This unexceptional witness, by his evidence, then showed 
 that the fault was not on the side of the landlords, and that 
 the action of the tenants of Ireland was quite inexcusable : 
 " But .there is no need to despair of overcoming this diffi- 
 " culty. According as the law is seen to be stronger than 
 "the organized resistance to it, tJie secret and indirect in- 
 "fluence which now operates upon the masses of tJie people
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 487 
 
 "may be expected to give way, and the moral forces 
 "which have been driven back and compelled to remain 
 "quiescent, will again assert their power. . . . The 
 " practice of ' boycotting ' is another evil which requires to 
 " be dealt with. It is a most potent engine in the hands 
 " of the Land Leaguers, and the effect of it has been to 
 "drive numbers of loyal men, who long stood aloof and 
 " have no sympathy with its dishonest and disloyal prin- 
 "ciples, to join the League in self-defence. If 'boycott- 
 " ing ' were made by law a malicious injury, for which 
 " compensation could be levied, an effectual blow would be 
 "struck at the nefarious practice. . . . There has been 
 "an abundant harvest, including a splendid potato crop, 
 " and the beneficial effects are seen in diminished pressure 
 " upon the poor. There is also a greater store of money in 
 " the banks much of it, no doubt, which ought to be in 
 "the landlords' pockets but it is in the country, at all 
 "events. . . . It is not for want of means that the 
 " farmers now refuse to pay their rents. Their prospects 
 " never were better. The cattle trade, as already stated, 
 " has improved, and the fear of American competition has 
 "declined. . . . He obtains high prices for his stock 
 " and produce ; he has a good market even at home, and 
 " with revived trade in England the demand for his sup- 
 " plies increases, and with it also his profits. He has no 
 " longer the excuse that he has no heart to work, because 
 " that his landlord might, as many have done, appropriate 
 " the value of his improvements. The times are changed, 
 "the tables are turned, and he is master of the situation. 
 " The Legislature has practically reversed the positions. He 
 " is owner of the soil, ivhile his landlord is only a receiver of 
 " rent (if he can get it). With his lease for fifteen years, 
 "and a covenant for perpetual renewal, at a rent fixed by 
 "himself and his neighbours, and with the sanction of his 
 "sympathetic friends, the Sub-commissioners, the tenant 
 " is better off than the nominal owner of the fee. . . . 
 " The land war, which it was thought would be put an end
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "to by the Land Act, is only about to begin in earnest. 
 "The landlords finding that, notwithstanding the suppres- 
 " sion of the Land League, they have the same organized 
 "opposition to encounter, are combined to resist it to 
 "extreme measures." 
 
 How manifest did it become to an impartial observer 
 nay, to a witness for the Government that the agitation 
 did not arise from the tyranny or injustice of landlords ; 
 that it was not due to the misery and want of the tenants ; 
 but that it came from an occult agency, which made the 
 agitation, and then used it as a means for attaining its 
 own secret and unhallowed ends ! What was that occult 
 agency? Let us again follow the thread as it winds 
 through the dark caverns and recesses of the labyrinth, till 
 we find where it ends. We remember that Mr. Chamber- 
 lain himself followed the thread into the Cabinet of 
 Ministers. We remember his speech : " I say deliberately 
 "that if this agitation [i.e., the Land League agitation, 
 " with all its machinery of terrorism] had followed English 
 " precedents ; if its leaders had carried it on within the 
 " spirit, as well as the letter of the law ; if they had dis- 
 " countenanced violence and intimidation, then there was 
 " never an agitation in the United Kingdom more deserv- 
 " ing of untiring sympathy and more entitled to complete 
 "success. Its original objects were legal, were even praise- 
 " worthy. To stifle the agitation at such a time [i.e., at 
 " any time before the Land Act passed] would have been 
 "to have prevented reform ; would have been also to have 
 " brought ruin to thousands and tens of thousands of in- 
 " nocent people, who are now protected by the Land Act." 
 
 That is not all Mr. Chamberlain said. He added : " Sir, 
 " it is no light thing at any time to suspend the Constitu- 
 " tion ; but to do as these Tories would have done, in 
 "order to gag the victims of injustice, in order to pre- 
 " vent the advocacy of necessary reforms ; that, it seems to 
 " me, would be a monstrous tyranny which no free people 
 "ought to endure. There was yet another reason ivJiich
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 "weighed with the Government, and which I think might 
 " well affect the j udgment of impartial men. If the agitation 
 " of the Land League had been then suppressed, the tenants 
 "of Ireland would have had no ORGANIZATION to fall back 
 " upon." 
 
 What were the " original objects " which Mr. Chamber- 
 lain had persuaded himself, or had been persuaded by 
 another, to consider " legal, even praiseworthy " ? They 
 were the abolition of the Protestant Irish landlords ; and, 
 as a means to that, " holding the harvest ; " and paying 
 "no rent." Then came boycottings, shootings, maimings, 
 terrorisms, and so forth. But the abolition of the Irish 
 landlords was not the ultimate object ; it was itself but a 
 means to the end. The end was the independence of Ire- 
 land as a separate Roman Catholic country. 
 
 Lord Carnarvon thus commented on Mr. Chamberlain's 
 admissions : " Mr. Chamberlain has stated if he has not 
 "stated, he has implied, if language has any force and 
 " value that Her Majesty's Government alloived the agita- 
 " tion to go on in Ireland, in order to give a better chance to 
 " their legislative nostrum. It is the act of French Jacobins 
 " during the French Revolution, when they stirred up the 
 " mob of a great town, in order to carry their own enact- 
 " ments. It means that laws are to be broken, that blood 
 " is to be shed, that property is to be endangered, in order 
 " to give a fair chance to a piece of legislation on which 
 " the Government has set its heart. 
 
 Thus the thread has led us into the Cabinet. But the 
 Cabinet is not one. There is always a Cabinet within a 
 Cabinet. In the late Lord Derby's time, the inner 
 Cabinet consisted of Lord Derby, Mr. D'Israeli, and the 
 Earl of Malmesbury. In Lord Palmerston's time, it con- 
 sisted of Lord Palmerston, acting sometimes alone and 
 sometimes with Mr. Gladstone. In Mr. D'Israeli's time, 
 the inner Cabinet was himself alone ; and he played off 
 Lord Salisbury and Lord Derby against each other, by 
 holding out to each, the hopes of a succession to the leader-
 
 490 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 ship of the Conservative party. In Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet, 
 Mr. Gladstone is alone and impenetrable. He doubtless 
 had talked over Mr. Chamberlain ; but he had not suc- 
 ceeded in circumventing the Duke of Argyll. The Times 
 of the last day of 1881, contained a letter from his Grace, 
 from which the following passages have been extracted. 
 His Grace thought it incumbent upon him to clear him- 
 self from complicity with the objects expressed by Mr. 
 Chamberlain. 
 
 " It is with regret that I feel compelled to notice one 
 " paragraph of the letter of the President of the Board of 
 " Trade (Mr. Chamberlain) addressed to Mr. Page Hopps, 
 " and published in your paper of the 26th. That paragraph 
 " is as follows : ' The avowed objects of the (Irish Land) 
 "'League the examination into a system, the reform of 
 " ' an unjust law were objects perfectly legal. They were 
 " ' objects approved by the Government which had pledged 
 " ' itself to effect them if it could! 
 
 " I have no desire to criticise any representation made by 
 " any member of the Government in respect to its opinions 
 " or policy now. But as this paragraph refers to tJie opinion 
 " of the Government at a time when I had the honour of 
 " being a member of it, I do feel called upon to say that the 
 " opinion here expressed I can only recognise as having 
 " been the individual opinion of the President of the Board 
 " of Trade, and certainly not as having been the opinion of the 
 " Government. . . . 
 
 " It is not correct to represent either the commission of 
 " outrages, or the long subsequent issue of the " No Rent " 
 " manifesto, or the passing of the Land Act, as having made 
 " any essential change either in the legality of the objects 
 " avowed by the Land League or in the legality of its 
 " methods of operation. All of these together, and all of 
 " them separately, were detailed by the Government in 
 " December, 1880, as objects and as acts of a criminal 
 " nature. It was just as illegal to incite and solicit tenants 
 " to pay no rent above Griffith's valuation, as to incite or
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 491 
 
 " solicit them to pay no rent at all. ... I limit myself 
 " now to the proposition that at no time, so far as I know, 
 " did the Government approve of the ' avowed objects ' of the 
 " League, and that during the whole autumn and winter of 
 " 1880, we publicly declared, in the most formal manner, 
 " that we held and knew these objects to be unlawful and 
 " unjust, both in themselves and in the systematic methods 
 " adopted for the attainment of them." 
 
 We have some curious and instructive facts before us. 
 There is not the slightest doubt as to the fact that the 
 Government allowed the Land League agitation to go on 
 unchecked for a considerable time. There is no doubt 
 that they kept the police out of the way, in accordance 
 with an agreement with Mr. Parnell. There is no doubt 
 that many of their acts did awake the Land League from 
 slumber, and give increased solidity and power to the Land 
 League agitation ; whether the Government intended it 
 or not, there is no doubt that they did it. There is no 
 doubt that Mr. Chamberlain admitted these facts, and then 
 justified them on the ground that if the Government had 
 interfered against the Land League agitation, it would have 
 prevented the passing of the Land Act. There is no doubt 
 that the Land Act was thought, by authoritative judges, 
 to have ruined the Irish landlords. There is no doubt 
 that Mr. Parnell sought the ruin of the Irish landlords, as 
 a means to the separation and independence of Ireland. 
 There is no doubt that Mr Parnell exulted in the Land 
 Act, as having very nearly brought about the ruin of the 
 landlords. There is no doubt that Mr. Chamberlain held 
 that those avowed objects of the Land League were praise- 
 worthy, and that he was under the impression that the 
 whole Cabinet had shared his opinion. There is no doubt 
 that there was a Cabinet within the Cabinet, from which 
 inner Cabinet the Duke of Argyll and the majority of the 
 Cabinet Ministers were excluded. Thus we have now fol- 
 lowed the thread to that inner Cabinet.
 
 4Q2 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 No. LXX. 
 
 Early in the year 1882, Mr. Chamberlain made a speech 
 to his constituents. It was a fitting opportunity for setting 
 himself right with the Duke of Argyll and the country. 
 What did he say ? He complained that the Opposition 
 opposed ! He ascribed their opposition to unworthy 
 motives : " It is because we lowered rents in Ireland, that 
 " the Tories are now so bitter against us. ... They 
 " say that a practical application has been given to the 
 " doctrine that even a landowner may not do what he likes 
 " with his own, if it is at the cost of robbery and injustice 
 " to other classes, and at the risk of danger to the whole 
 " community." He then turned his attention to the " claim 
 " for compensation for Irish landlords who have been de- 
 " prived of the right of exacting excessive and extortionate 
 " rents from their unfortunate tenants. Now, I wish this 
 " claim for compensation were stated for your consideration 
 " a little more clearly. Let us consider, in the first place, 
 " what it amounts to in money. Up to the present time the 
 " decisions of the Court have established reductions of rent to 
 " the extent of the average of 25 per cent. Supposing that 
 " the cases taken are a fair average for the whole of Ire- 
 land, then it follows that 25 percent, upon the present 
 " rents of that country would amount to something like 
 " 4,000,000 a year, and 4,000,000 a year are worth as a 
 "capital sum at twenty-five years' purchase 100,000,000 
 " sterling." 
 
 What argument is this ? We have confiscated your 
 property (he says) ; we have robbed you, it is true. But 
 as the robbery is of so enormous an amount, it is no crime, 
 and has not to be repaid ! So much for Mr. Chamberlain's 
 conceptions of morality ! But how has it set him right 
 with the Duke of Argyll ? What becomes of his admis- 
 sions concerning the inner Cabinet ?
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 493 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain, who had joined in the senseless cry 
 that " force is no remedy," next proclaimed his utter ignor- 
 ance of political science, and his denial of the many moral 
 powers by which men are ruled. With him, all men are 
 mere beasts of burden, who understand nothing but the 
 thong on their backs and the bit and bridle in their mouths. 
 
 " It seems to me that all government necessarily rests 
 " upon coercion in the last resort. I think it ought ; and I 
 " will say, moreover, it is much better for the people that 
 " a responsible and active Government should resort to 
 " force in order to maintain order and tranquillity, rather 
 " than it should permit an irresponsible and an unrepre- 
 " sentative organization by force also for they use the 
 " methods of which they complain so much that they are 
 " used by the Government by force also to attempt to 
 " throw the country into confusion and Revolution. I would 
 " test this point by asking a question. Suppose that the 
 " Irish Republic, which has apparently attained its embryonic 
 " state in A merica, were really to be established, and suppose 
 " Mr. Parnell himself were to be the first President of that 
 " Republic. I imagine that he would be prepared, under 
 " those circumstances, to maintain his authority and pro- 
 " tect his fellow-citizens by force, if force were necessary ; 
 " and if any section of his countrymen combined to refuse 
 " to pay the taxes as they now combine to refuse to pay 
 " rent, and if they adopted the same methods in order to 
 " secure success, I say it is perfectly clear that in that case 
 " Mr. Parnell and his Government would have to resort to 
 " the very stringent measures of coercion, or else they and 
 " he would be swept away together ; and, in the present 
 " state of Ireland, I do not hesitate to say that / see only 
 " one alternative to the course which we have pursued, and 
 " that is, that we should declare that tfo resources of states- 
 " manship are exhausted ; that we cannot govern Ireland to 
 " the satisfaction of its people ; that we cannot conciliate the 
 "nation, and, therefore, that WE MUST RESOLVE TO 
 "LET THEM GO AND TO ESTABLISH THEIR
 
 494 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " INDEPENDENCE. That is the alternative which some 
 " Liberals hold we should adopt, and I admit their consis- 
 " tency in objecting to any resort to coercion now ; but, 
 " for my part, I think it would be a conclusion so fraught 
 " with disaster to Ireland, so dangerous to the interests 
 " of England, that I will never willingly consent to it." 
 L 1 enfant terrible ! He has let out some more family 
 secrets ! He has again blabbed the arcana of the inner 
 Cabinet ! 
 
 Lastly, Mr. Chamberlain evinced his disregard of facts. 
 He, perhaps, had never heard of the Bessborough Com- 
 mission. He, perchance, thought light of the asseveration 
 of the Prime Minister himself, that the landlords had been 
 put on their trial, and completely exonerated. Mr. Cham- 
 berlain said : " He wanted to know if the Tories were 
 " going to follow up their present tactics in order, as a 
 " matter of fact, that they might have 100 millions of 
 " money out of the pockets of the taxpayers of England 
 " in order to put it into the pockets of the Irish landlords, 
 " who were the persons they wanted to punish for demanding 
 " such extortionate rents. What he urged was this, that if 
 " there was any compensation for the landlords, it should 
 " go to the tenants. He maintained that these tenants and 
 " their predecessors had been robbed of their improvements 
 " and all stimulus to energy had been taken away, and 
 " the cases which he had quoted were almost sufficient to 
 " account for the outrage, which they all so much deplored, 
 " and which could never be justified in the legislation 
 " which had been passed." So ! the Government " wanted 
 " to punish " the Irish landlords ! That was their pre- 
 tended ground for the Land Act ! It reminds us of the 
 " revenge " which the Jesuit alleged as the ground of the 
 agitation : revenge for the acts of King William ! Still 
 Mr. Chamberlain failed to remove the impression caused 
 by his revelations of the inner Cabinet. 
 
 Mr. Bright spoke at the same meeting. He spoke before 
 Mr. Chamberlain, and the two speeches were scarcely con-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 495 
 
 sistent. Mr. Chamberlain laid all the blame on the landlords, 
 accusing them of crimes of which they had already been 
 completely acquitted ; and saying that the outrages were 
 "fully accounted for," probably he meant justified, by 
 those supposed crimes of landlords doubtless on the 
 principle that revenge is just. Mr. Bright, on the other 
 hand, declared that the tenantry of Ireland had been 
 worked up, by foreign agitators and revolutionists, into a 
 state of sedition and rebellion : " They complain that the 
 " law is suspended. I grant that it is suspended, and I 
 " reply, ' By whom was the law first suspended in Ireland ? 
 " I do not think I am mistaken in saying that a member 
 "for Ireland, in the House of Commons, said that the 
 " ordinary law or the ordinary Government was knocked 
 " into a cocked hat. I believe it is intended as a phrase of 
 " the utmost contempt. But surely when a man stands up 
 "in the House of Commons, a representative of an Irish 
 " constituency, and tells the Government and tJu wJiole of the 
 " Commons of England, as they sit in Parliament, that the 
 "association with which he is connected has knocked the 
 " whole of the Queens Government in Ireland into a cocked 
 " hat, he has at any rate no right to complain and howl 
 " because the Government have felt it necessary to suspend 
 " the law. The loyal men in the three kingdoms complain 
 " that this state of things was going on. . . . The ques- 
 " tion is whether you are to allow terror to be master in 
 " a considerable portion of Ireland, or whether you are to 
 " attempt a remedy. . . . / said last year, on this plat- 
 "form, that we were on the eve or in the midst of something 
 " like social revolt in Ireland. There were the elements of dis- 
 " content ; there have always been, so far as I have known 
 " anything of Ireland, and there have generally been some 
 " bad men willing to make use of and stir up these elements 
 " of discontent. At present tliere is a conspiracy discovered, 
 " much of it seen and altogether undeniable a conspiracy 
 " which is in reality a treason to the Crown, and whose object 
 " is the breaking up of the United Kingdom. It is based
 
 496 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " not on a love of the tenantry of Ireland, but on a hatred 
 "of England. ... I will give you two or three extracts 
 " from what has been said at a recent meeting of the Irish 
 " Convention in the city of Chicago. I take the extracts 
 " from a newspaper of the Irish party in America. . . . 
 " The first person who spoke at this Convention was John 
 " F. Finighty, who said: 'Ireland is nothing less than 
 " ' England's bitterest foe, and we are nothing less than 
 " ' Ireland's unquenchable and uncompromising allies.' 
 " Then there were two Irish members of the House of 
 "Commons Mr. T. P. O'Connor, M.P., said : ' Now, in 
 " ' England, as to the future, the contest between England 
 " ' and Ireland at first sight might be a thing that it would 
 " ' seem folly or madness to talk about. The Irish people 
 " ' have no army as yet. The English Government has a 
 " ' large army.' You see exactly what is the intention 
 " there and what it intimates. Well, then, there was a 
 " Catholic priest, Father Sheehy. This is what he said : 
 " ' / want to tell you here to-night that we face landlordism 
 " ' and aim at its utter destruction, but only as a stepping- 
 " ' stone and a means to a, greater and a higher end. . . 
 " ' Will you be content to go on paying what is called a 
 " ' fair rent, an abomination, a crime, not alone against 
 " ' modern civilization in Ireland, but against common 
 " ' sense, and blasphemy against God ?.../# France 
 "'landlordism was swept down and crushed utterly into 
 " 'powder by tlie armed hand of revolution. . . . That 
 " ' is what we should do. ... If any gentleman will 
 " ' undertake the commission, he will have my benediction.' 
 " Then further on he said this : ' I look in their hearts, and 
 " ' I see a burning love of Ireland, and I see a burning 
 " ' hatred to England ; I see that there is on this earth only 
 '"one enemy of Ireland, and that enemy is England. 
 " ' ... I would not be satisfied with legislative inde- 
 " ' pendence if I were not satisfied that there was a day in 
 " ' the future when the Irish race would revenge themselves 
 " ' upon their enemies.' Well, I must take one little
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 497 
 
 " quotation from the speech of another member of the 
 " House of Commons Mr. Healy. He said : ' For what is 
 " ' the business for which this Convention has assembled ? 
 " ' It is for the purpose of revenge, as I take it revenge 
 1 ' upon the enemy which drove you and your fathers forth 
 " ' from their own lands.' Then, ' Hats were flying in the 
 " ' air, mouths were opened wide, when the pronunciamiento 
 " ' of the embryotic Irish Republic was launched at the 
 " ' British animal with a hurrah.' Now, only one thing 
 " more of this Convention. Mr. Gannon, the representative 
 " for the State of Iowa, after the address had been passed, 
 " said, ' But what does the Land League mean ? It means 
 "'Ireland really choosing representatives to send to the 
 " ' Old House in College Green. Yes, it means the flag of 
 "'the Irish Republic floating over its central dome, and 
 " ' the citizen soldier there prepared and able to defend it.'" 
 
 Mr. Bright spoke of " the embryotic Irish Republic." 
 Mr. Chamberlain used the expression, " the Irish Republic 
 " which has apparently attained its embryonic state." The 
 conversation of the Cabinet had so accustomed these 
 gentlemen to the idea of an Irish Republic, that they were 
 able to contemplate that High Treason with calmness, and 
 speak of it without horror ? How far the inner Cabinet 
 might have got, in that direction, it was impossible to 
 say. 
 
 Let us return to the Land Act. Mr. Justice O'Hagan 
 and Mr. Litton decided that, 1 under " Healy's clause," no 
 tenant is to be deemed to have been compensated for his 
 improvements, by the mere enjoyment of them, for any 
 time, however long, and at any rent, however low. This 
 was of course a complete admission of Mr. Parnell's doc- 
 trine that the landlord could claim, for his land, only the 
 value which it might have had " when the waters of the 
 " Deluge left it," only the " prairie value," as it was after- 
 wards called. As Mr. Gladstone appeared to have given 
 
 1 St. Jamefs Gazette, January 19, 1882. 
 
 K K
 
 498 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 the Commissioners some "unseen but well understood 
 " lines," to guide their judgments, and as their decisions 
 had always proved to be in complete accordance with the 
 doctrines of Parnell and the Land League, it was fairly 
 assumed that an identity in policy and aim existed between 
 the Prime Minister of England, and the de facto Govern- 
 ment of Ireland. 
 
 The Chief Commissioners next sat to hear appeals from 
 the judgments of the Sub-commissioners at Belfast 1 In 
 twenty-five cases out of forty, where the rents had been 
 reduced more than twenty-five per cent, the decisions on 
 appeal were given in favour of the tenants. In four cases 
 the tenants' applications for further reductions of rent were 
 given in favour of the tenant ; while in the remaining cases 
 very fractional augmentations of rent, above the judicial 
 rent, were given to the landlords. The judgment of the 
 Sub-commissioners on M'Atavey's case was confirmed. No 
 wonder that Archbishop Croke should have been able to 
 contain himself no longer. He went to Waterford on 
 Sunday afternoon, exulting and triumphant, 2 and said 
 that " The land agitation had done an immense amount 
 " of good for the people of Ireland. It might be said to 
 "have reduced the rental of Ireland by one quarter; so 
 " that, taking the entire rental at twenty millions, it placed 
 " five millions a-year in the pockets of the tenant farmers 
 " of Ireland." 
 
 If Archbishop Croke could exult, others could deplore. 
 There were open secessions of peers from Mr. Gladstone's 
 ranks. One of them, Earl Grey, wrote the following letter: 
 " I cannot understand how it happens that all who are 
 " interested in the land, or in the welfare of England 
 "generally, do not take the same view of the subject as 
 " Lord Zetland, and refuse to go on supporting a man who, 
 " on every really important question, acts against the old 
 " opinions of all the great Whig leaders in the old days, 
 " when the Whigs were a party to which I for one was 
 1 St. James's Gazette, January 21. 2 Ibid., January 24.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 4 r 9 
 
 "proud to belong, and of which I will not give up the tra- 
 " ditions because a set of men choose to call themselves 
 "the successors of a party with which they have really 
 " nothing in common. Is it not strange that people do not 
 " look back a little, and see what have been the results of 
 " Mr. Gladstone's policy ? There is an old saying that the 
 " proof of the pudding is in the eating, and Mr. Gladstone's 
 "pudding has proved very bitter eating. In 1868, when 
 " Mr. Gladstone began his agitation about Ireland and de- 
 " nounced the 'Upas-tree] Ireland was rapidly improving. The 
 " landlords and tenants were as a rule on good terms with each 
 " other, and Fenianism, as Mr. Gladstone himself admitted, 
 "met with no support whatever from the small farmers. . . . 
 " But Mr. Gladstone stimulated the excitable Irish people to 
 " half madness by his speeches, denouncing the grievances he 
 " said they were labouring under, and which he had not raised 
 " a finger to remove during all the years that he had before 
 " been in office. Having used the state of Ireland as a lever 
 "to upset the previous Government, he came into power 
 " himself, and passed the measure which he told us was 
 "to give prosperity to Ireland. After dealing with the 
 " Church question in the very worst way, he gave us the 
 "unfortunate Land Bill of 1870, which first gave the Irish 
 "tenants a slice of the landlords' property, and, as was 
 " sure to happen, created among them an appetite for 
 " more, and raised the feelings of cupidity which have led 
 "to the results we now see. Last session, he passed his 
 " new Land Bill, and the way in which it is working shows 
 " the incapacity of its author in the most striking way." 
 
 On Feb. 6 the world was astonished by the republica- 
 tion, as a pamphlet under official authority, of a series of 
 articles from the Freeman's Journal. The title of the 
 pamphlet was, " How to become tJie Oivner of your Farm. 
 " Why Irish landlords should sell, and Irish tenants should 
 ''purchase ; and how they can do it under the Land Act of 
 "1881." The pamphlet must have been for some time 
 ready and waiting for an opportune moment for publica-
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 tion, as the prefatory note was dated "Nov., 1881." At 
 the end of the pamphlet, the signature was appended : 
 " The Secretary Irish Land Commission, 24, Upper Merrion 
 " St., Dublin" and there was the usual official imprint, 
 stating that the pamphlet had been issued by "Alexander 
 " Thorn & Co., The Qneeris Printing Office; for Her Majesty's 
 " Stationery Office; 3,564 2,000, I, '82," showing that 2,000 
 copies had been printed in the first month of 1882. The 
 Secretary of the Land Commission therein stated that : 
 " To the Irish Land Commission had been confided the 
 " task of bringing about a peasant proprietary." The Irish 
 tenant was then asked whether he doubted that it would 
 be to his advantage that he should be enabled to purchase 
 the fee-simple of his holding? and he was told, " If he 
 " doubts it, then he doubts the doctrine which Davitt unfolded 
 " at Irishtown, and for the teaching of which that far-seeing' 
 " man founded the Irish National Land League the most 
 " widespread, the most powerful, and in its effects we believe 
 " the most enduring organization of our time. If he doubts 
 " it, then have Parnell and Dillon and Davitt laboured and 
 " suffered in vain'.' 
 
 From this it may be inferred that the Irish Land Com- 
 mission had been instituted by Mr. Gladstone in order to 
 carry out the views of the Fenian convict Davitt ! The 
 Secretary continued : " Strangers have been surprised at the 
 " keen intelligence which the Irish peasant has shown on 
 " the question ; and it is impossible to suppose that men, 
 " to whom the arguments of the Land League leaders are 
 " familiar as household words, should have failed to grasp 
 " the principle which the Land League was founded to back 
 " the principle, namely, that Irish tenants should strive and 
 " strive until they were put in the position to purchase out 
 " and out their holdings, so that they should be owners 
 " and freemen, instead of being tenants and slaves. The 
 "desirability of the change will be cordially admitted by 
 " every Irish tenant, the desirability, not alone from the 
 "point of view of his own comfort and prosperity and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 501 
 
 " freedom, but also because, in effecting the change, he will 
 " give proof of his loyalty to the principles of the organiza- 
 tion which has been the means of bringing about the 
 " change." 
 
 The Land League was founded for the same object as 
 that for which Mr. Gladstone appears to have created the 
 Land Commission, namely, to oust the Protestant land- 
 lords and substitute a Roman Catholic peasant proprietary. 
 One of the means used to bring about that end was the 
 utter impoverishment of the landlords and the depreciation 
 in value of their land. This was the meaning of the " No 
 " Rent " cry. The Secretary of the Land Commission 
 alluded to it : " The landlord who is wise will remember 
 " that he has now no probable purchaser but his tenants no 
 " outsiders who, for the prestige of owning a large tract of 
 " land, will pay him a heavy price for his estate. The pur- 
 " chasing public will, for each estate, be practically limited to 
 " the tenants upon it ; the landlord must sell to them or not 
 " at all. No position can be more anxious, more worrying, 
 " more wasteful, more unprofitable in every aspect of the 
 " case, than that of a heavily-encumbered owner of an out- 
 " lying estate in Ireland in the hands of tenants. The 
 " owner of such an estate is no longer an object of envy 
 " and admiration, but of pity." 
 
 That is the teaching which was given, at the public 
 expense, to the half-insurgent, more than half-criminal, and 
 ever disloyal people of Ireland ! It was for this that Mr. 
 Gladstone had established the Land Commission ! His 
 pretence in doing it was the furtherance of justice ; yet it 
 was really the Commission of injustice. The Commission 
 which was ostensibly instituted to judge justly between 
 landlord and tenant, was really established to bring about 
 a peasant proprietary ; and the means by which it was 
 destined to attain that end was, by means of their de- 
 cisions, to cheapen the value of estates, and, by means of 
 official pamphlets, to tout for purchasers at the reduced 
 prices ! The fallen landlord was then to be kicked by the
 
 502 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Secretary of the Commission, and told that his former 
 " prestige " had been, by the Commission Court, so far 
 destroyed, that it had no longer any attractions for 
 "outsiders," so that each landlord's own tenants were 
 "the only possible purchasers." The Secretary of the 
 Land Commission, may be supposed to have exclaimed : 
 " See ! the policy which Davitt and the Land League 
 " urged you to pursue, and which we, the Land Com- 
 " mission, were instituted to carry out, has already worried 
 " out the landlords and ruined them ; they must sell, and 
 " you may buy cheap. But if any stiff-necked landlord 
 "here or there should be found to be obdurate, then pursue 
 " the same policy with increased vigour, and you will 
 " eventually be successful." The fruits of the agitation 
 and the Land Commission had so far been a reduction of 
 thirty per cent in the landlords' rental. The continuation 
 of the agitation, which was hinted at in the Commissioners' 
 pamphlet, would of course cause a further reduction, or 
 even the total ruin of the landlords of Ireland. 
 
 The Times of February 7, 1882, in commenting on a 
 letter of " R. O'H." (was the chief Land Commissioner, 
 O'Hagan, the writer of it ?), thus delivered its judgment : 
 " We published, on January 9, a letter calling attention to 
 " an indirect injury inflicted by the Irish Land Act on the 
 " lenders and borrowers of money on the security of landed 
 " property in Ireland. The position of both these parties, 
 " our correspondent * R. O'H.' pointed out, is changed for 
 " the worse by the general reduction of Irish rents which 
 " has taken place under the Act. . . . From the borrower's 
 " point of view, the results are even more disastrous. The 
 " lender can call in his money, and, if he fails to obtain it, 
 " can have the land sold and his claim satisfied out of the 
 " proceeds. The borrower can have no such resource as 
 " this. . . . Moreover, what to the lender was a margin 
 " of safety, was to him a margin of income. The reduced 
 " rent no longer yields him the old surplus to live upon. 
 " The entire proceeds of his land are swallowed up in the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 503 
 
 "payment of interest to his old or to his new creditor. 
 " His choice is thus either to remain the titular possessor 
 " of an estate which brings him in nothing, or to part with 
 " his estate and to pay his mortgage debt out of it, and to 
 " be left at the end of the transaction with a balance of 
 " nothing in his favour. The hardship is unquestionable." 
 The deliberate decision of the Times was, that both land- 
 lords and mortgagees had been ruined by Mr. Gladstone. 
 
 On Thursday, February 9, during the adjourned debate 
 on the Address to the Crown, Mr. P. J. Smyth moved 
 an amendment in favour of " Home Rule," or rather, 
 the separation of Ireland from England. The words of 
 the resolution were : " Humbly to assure Her Majesty 
 "that, in the opinion of this House, the only efficacious 
 "remedy for the deplorable condition of Ireland, is the re- 
 " adjustment of the political relations established between 
 "Great Britain and Ireland by the Act of Legislative 
 " Union of 1800." That Mr. P. J. Smyth should have 
 done so, was considered natural ; and his speech attracted 
 very little attention. Every member was aware that every 
 statesman hitherto had not only declared unequivocally 
 against Home Rule ; but had also consistently refused 
 even a Committee of Inquiry into the question, on the 
 ground that it would be a sheer waste of time. They all 
 held that the result of one country having its own Parlia- 
 ment, while another country had a separate Parliament, 
 would certainly be the separation into two countries, if 
 one of those countries was Ireland. Yet Mr. Gladstone 
 not only conceded the propriety of inquiring, but he also 
 challenged the Home Rulers to draw up the necessary 
 distinction between local and Imperial questions. He 
 moreover announced to the Irish members that the Govern- 
 ment had already prepared a Bill for " the Local Government 
 " of Ireland" Here, then, was a great stimulant applied, 
 by the Prime Minister, to the Land League agitation, 
 whose ultimate aim had always been the separation of 
 Ireland from England. Here was the separatist and revo-
 
 504 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 lutionary spirit of Ireland galvanized by Gladstone into 
 renewed life and vehement energy ! 
 
 Yes ! Mr. Gladstone, the Prime Minister of England, 
 pronounced that the question of Home Rule not only 
 might be inquired into and debated, but should, and ought 
 to be, debated. Mr. P. J. Smyth had affirmed that the 
 only remedy for the ills of Ireland was the Repeal of the 
 Union. Mr. Gladstone, following out the policy of Tyr- 
 connel, had worried out the landlords of Ireland ; and 
 then, fulfilling the promise of the Provincial of the Jesuits 
 in 1873, he said that Mr. P. J. Smyth's proposition "was 
 " entitled to discussion, and effectual discussion ; " he de- 
 sired that it should not only be debated, but should also 
 be put into effect He added, moreover, that his only 
 regret at its having been raised on the Address, was that 
 "effectual discussion" could not, on such an occasion, be 
 given to it. Mr. Gladstone, in desiring effect to be given 
 to Home Rule principles as distinguished, of course, from 
 those of the I. R. B., or Irish Republican Brotherhood 
 looked for an Irish autonomy (an Irish Parliament) with 
 some Supreme Authority over all the empire, to unite all 
 its autonomous portions into one. That Supreme Au- 
 thority could not, of course, be the English Parliament, as 
 that would be an effective denial of local autonomy. 
 
 Here follows the memorable speech of Feb. 9. Mr. P. 
 J. Smyth having expressed a desire to withdraw his 
 amendment, at which cries of " No " arose, Mr. Gladstone 
 rose and said : " As there is an indisposition to allow the 
 "amendment to be withdrawn, of course I can only express 
 " my regret at that indisposition. I do so, not because I 
 "am averse to the discussion my hon. friend has raised 
 "not because the subject introduced yesterday in so excel- 
 " lent a spirit, and with so much eloquence, is unworthy of 
 "our attention but because I think that, recommended 
 " as it is by him, it is entitled to discussion, and effectual 
 "discussion; but that effectual discussion cannot be had 
 " upon this occasion. . . . With regard to the question
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 505 
 
 " of the extension of local government in Ireland^ it was a 
 " matter of great pain to us to find that, owing to the im- 
 " pediments thrown in our way last session, we were unable 
 " to persevere with a measure of local government for Ire- 
 " land, of which we had given notice of our intention and 
 "desire to introduce. We attach the greatest -value to the 
 " extension perliaps I ought to say to the establishment ojr 
 " local government in that country. We believe that one of 
 " the great evils under which the country labours is that of 
 "local administration. . . . But that is treating of the sub- 
 "j'ect of purely local administration. The motion of the hon. 
 " member embraces other matters of wider scope. . . . Two 
 " hon. members, who belong to what is known in Ireland 
 "as the Popular party, have spoken to-night, and both of 
 "them are entitled to the respect of this House namely, 
 "the hon. member for King's County, and the hon. mem- 
 "ber for the county of Limerick. Both recommend that 
 "arrangements should be made to enable an Irish legis- 
 "lative body to deal with Irish affairs, and both declare 
 " their adhesion to the principle of the preservation of the 
 "integrity of the Empire, and their desire that Imperial 
 "questions should continue to be treated in an Imperial 
 "Parliament in which Ireland should be represented. As 
 "far as their general declarations go, I do not think that any 
 " exception can justly be taken to them ; but, at the same 
 "time, these hon. members have shown how differently 
 " they construe the words which they themselves have used. 
 "I will not undertake to say at what decision this House 
 " might arrive on this proposal, provided a plan were to be 
 " laid before us under which what are purely Irish matters 
 " could be clearly and definitely separated from what are 
 "purely Imperial matters. . . . The principle upon 
 "which the hon. members propose to proceed is this 
 "that purely Irish matters should be dealt with by a 
 "purely Irish authority, and that purely Imperial matters 
 "should be dealt with by an Imperial Chamber, in which 
 " Ireland is to be represented. But they have not told us
 
 506 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "how we are to distinguish between the two classes of 
 " subjects. Until they devise some plan for separating these 
 " classes of subjects, I do not see how we are to arrive at any 
 " effective judgment iipon the merits of tJieir proposal" 
 
 What shall we say of the effect of Mr. Gladstone's 
 words on Ireland ? Were they not calculated to encourage 
 agitation and give strength and support to the Land 
 League, whose ultimate aim, as Mr. Parnell frequently 
 stated, was autonomy for Ireland ? Was his speech not a 
 direct invitation to the Home Rule party to imitate the 
 tactics of the Land League, which had supplanted, by 
 means of outrage and sedition, the Home Rule Association 
 and ousted it from power ? What party would gain, and 
 what principles would be enforced, then, by this speech ? 
 The Revolutionary or Separatist party must reap all the 
 gains, and the principles of the Irish Republican Brother- 
 hood must be disseminated on the authority of the Prime 
 Minister of England. The Irish agitators had no idea of 
 anything except a Republic like that of France in 1792. 
 Mr. Gladstone's "flesh and blood" speech brought the 
 country to household suffrage ; his Home Rule speech in 
 which he said of Mr. P. J. Smyth and his friends, " As far 
 " as their general declarations go, I do not think that any 
 "exception can justly be taken to them " must bring an 
 Irish Republic "within the sphere of practical politics." 
 The Prime Minister of the British Parliament had thus cut 
 himself off from objecting, that a separate Legislature must 
 necessarily lead to a separate State. 
 
 The French newspapers naturally expressed their aston- 
 ishment: J " How can Mr. Gladstone imagine that the Irish 
 "will not make use of their local privileges to arrive at 
 " entire political independence ? Lastly, and above all, we 
 " see that his Thursday's 3 speech opened a question it is 
 " no longer in his power to close, and prepared for his 
 " Government a crisis in which it might easily collapse." 
 On February 13, Mr. Plunket, in his place in the House, 
 1 Times, February 14. 3 Wednesday's.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 507 
 
 challenged Mr. Gladstone either to accept or disavow the 
 interpretation which had been universally given to his 
 invitation to the Home Rule party. Mr. Gladstone made 
 no response. His silence was ominous ; more significant 
 than words. The next day Mr. Sexton, regarding Mr. 
 Gladstone's silence as a happy augury, made a speech 
 which no supporter of Mr. Gladstone thought that Mr. 
 Gladstone could have allowed to remain unanswered. But 
 what a change had come over the country within six days ! 
 Six days ago, most Englishmen regarded Home Rule as a 
 fantastic imagination of Mr. Butt, which he knew to be too 
 wild to be ever regarded in earnest. Not a statesman in 
 England condescended to give the subject one moment's 
 thought ! Now, what shall we say ? After a few vague 
 words from Mr. Gladstone, the mind of the whole of 
 England had turned round. Conservatives studied the 
 subject of Home Rule in irritation and anger, as a night- 
 mare they must seek, by all their wisdom, to dispel ; the 
 Liberals studied it to find excuses for supporting it, and 
 arguments to prove Mr. Gladstone's perspicuity and far- 
 sightedness. Every Liberal member said to his fellow : 
 " After all, there is nothing so dreadful in Home Rule : I 
 " may tell you that I myself have always been favourable 
 " to it, since I can remember." 
 
 No. LXXI. 
 
 MR. SEXTON, an eloquent Irishman, traced, in his speech 
 of Feb. 14, 1882, the origin of the Land League, asserting 
 that its objects had been to stop rack-renting, and to con- 
 vert occupiers into peasant proprietors by getting rid of tJie 
 landlords. If, said he, there had been no Land League, 
 there would have been no Land Act. Yet that Act carried 
 out only the first part of the Land League's programme ; 
 and when the League continued to agitate for the second 
 part (the autonomy of Ireland), the Castle Government
 
 SoS RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 suppressed the League. Even the Land question was not 
 as yet settled (he averred), and could be settled only by 
 the abolition of landlordism. The Land Act, which was 
 supposed to have settled it, was but a dismal failure, in- 
 volving an enormous cost for very little work. Mr. Sexton 
 also heartily concurred in Mr. Parnell's wish, that the 
 agitation might not be allowed to cease, " until the detest- 
 " able alien rule of tJie ' Buckshot Government? which has 
 " kept the country impoverished, has been got rid of." He 
 added that he trusted that the recent speech of Mr. Glad- 
 stone, the Prime Minister, foreshadowed the concession of 
 those Irish demands. Boycotting, Mr. Sexton defended ; 
 he did so on the ground that it was necessary, and there- 
 fore justifiable, for the Irish, who " were living under an 
 " alien law made by another Community? For he regarded 
 the House of Commons as unhomogeneous. The Irish 
 and English, he intimated, could never amalgamate. They 
 must/<?r ever remain as separate Communities, as the Jews 
 in the midst of Gentile nations. The Irish had, in fact, 
 hoisted the anti-English standard. The Celts, or Cim- 
 merians, had proclaimed their old blood hate of the Saxon 
 race. The extinction of the English landlords in Ireland 
 was the aspiration of this feeling ; and yet it was subor- 
 dinate to their further end of utter separation from Eng- 
 land. Hence Mr. Sexton exhorted the Irish " to have the 
 "courage and wisdom to stand upon the lines of the 'No- 
 "' rent Manifesto,' " and he predicted that the landlords 
 would thus be starved out, and the English Government 
 defeated in its attempt to put down Irish lawlessness. It 
 was this Nationalist doctrine of separation, which Mr. 
 Gladstone had encouraged by his speech on Wednesday ! 
 
 There was truth in Mr. Sexton's remark that the Land 
 Act was " a dismal failure." The remedial measure had 
 not brought peace, but a sword. " Its cost was enormous, 
 for very little real work which was done." According to 
 the estimates of February, 1882, the charge for the thirteen 
 Courts of the Land Commission amounted, during the short
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 509 
 
 time of its ex-istence, to .84,919. The rental dealt with 
 amounted only to 38,000. The salary of a non-legal 
 assistant Commissioner was 750 a year, while the legal 
 gentlemen of course drew a far higher revenue. How 
 much cheaper and better it would have been to have put 
 the 85 ,000 into the pockets of the tenants, or to have 
 expended it on effecting permanent improvements, without 
 disturbing the country and robbing the landlords! But 
 this would not have attained the ultimate aim, the ruin 
 and expatriation of the Protestant landlords, and the 
 separation of Ireland from England, which was the policy 
 of King James II. and Tyrconnel. 
 
 After this speech, from Mr. Sexton, the debate on the 
 address was allowed to collapse without any reply, or even 
 explanation from Mr. Gladstone. A discussion arose on 
 the report, which was taken on Wednesday, Feb. 15. That 
 sitting also was terminated ; and Mr. Gladstone had offered 
 no word of explanation. On Feb. 16, however, Mr. Glad- 
 stone felt himself constrained to speak. During his speech, 
 he alluded to his former speech. He did not trust himself, 
 accomplished orator that he was, to speak on this subject. 
 He took up a written paper from the table and read the 
 following words, which had doubtless been prepared with 
 the greatest care, art, and circumspection. 
 
 " Well, sir, I am now about to submit myself to exami- 
 " nation on a matter to which the right hon. gentleman has 
 " referred namely, the short speech recently made by me, 
 " not indeed upon the motion of my hon. friend the member 
 " for Tipperary (Mr. P. J. Smyth), but upon the general 
 "subject of what is termed Home Rule, and in particular 
 " upon two speeches with respect to Home Rule delivered 
 "by two hon. members in that part of the House. Sir, 
 "my great difficulty in referring to this subject is that I 
 " feel that I might, perhaps, if one of the rules, which it 
 " may be my duty to propose in a few days, were already 
 " in force, be liable to be arrested in the middle of my 
 " speech by you, on the ground of ' tedious and unnecessary
 
 Sic RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " ' iteration.' So often have I repeated, upon so many occa- 
 " sions, the sentiments that I delivered last week, and so 
 " innoxious have they been deemed iipon those occasions, that I 
 " own I was a little surprised at the sensitiveness of one of 
 "the members for Dublin University, who rose to take 
 " notice of the dangerous matter they contained. But I 
 " do not believe that even his attack upon them would 
 " have succeeded in producing any excitement upon the 
 "subject, had it not been followed which was much more 
 " fatal to them by an expression of opinion, in qualified 
 " language, from the hon. member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton). 
 " It is naturally said that anything he could possibly 
 "approve must necessarily be full of danger and mischief. 
 " Well, this is a subject on which I have very distinct and 
 " clear opinions opinions Tvhich I have never scrupled to 
 " declare. They are not held by many gentlemen, probably, in 
 " this House. They may be considered of a speculative 
 " character. It is highly unlikely that I shall ever be called 
 " upon to take practical part in relation to those opinions ; 
 " but / have the very strongest opinions upon the nature of local 
 "government. I have the strongest objections to the tendency, 
 " which I see constantly prevail, to the centralization of 
 "government not for Ireland merely, but for England. I 
 " hold this tendency to be open to the gravest objections, 
 " and I will take it and profess it at all points, as a cardinal 
 " rule of policy, so far as I can, with regard to the general 
 " structure and safety of the empire, to decentralize Parlia- 
 " ment. I believe that local institutions the institution of 
 "secondary authorities is a great source of strength, and 
 " that in principle the only necessary limit to those powers is 
 " the adequate and certain provision for the supremacy of the 
 " central authority, I believe that when the demand is made 
 "from Ireland, for bringing purely Irish affairs more espe- 
 " dally or more largely under Irish control outside the walls 
 " of Parliament, the wise way to meet that demand is not 
 " the method adopted by the senior member for the 
 " University of Dublin, who said that anything recognising
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 511 
 
 " purely Irish control over purely Irish affairs must be 
 " necessarily a step towards separation, and must therefore 
 " be fraught with danger ; that I do not believe to be the 
 "wise or the just method of dealing with the subject. In 
 " my opinion, the wise and just method of dealing with it 
 " is this : to require that before any such plan can be dealt 
 " with, or can be examined with a view to being dealt with 
 " on its merits, those who propose it and this is a question 
 " I have universally put should answer this point What 
 "are the provisions which you propose to make for the 
 "supremacy of Parliament? That has been my course, 
 " and that is the course in which I intend to persevere." 
 
 Such a speech, or rather such a studied declaration, 
 went much further in favour of Home Rule than Mr. 
 Gladstone's speech on that memorable Wednesday. He 
 took care to let it be understood that what he had pre- 
 viously said did not refer merely to Irish Municipal and 
 County Government, but to a separate Irish Parliament, 
 to the fullest principle of Home Rule. The Parliament at 
 Westminster, according to Mr. Gladstone, should no longer 
 interfere with Irish affairs. The only proviso which Mr. 
 Gladstone made, was "the supremacy of the central 
 " authority" Be it remarked that he said, "central autho- 
 " rity," not "Parliament." The Irish Parliament is, then, to 
 make its own laws, levy its own taxes, decide its policy, and 
 so forth; only a " central authority " is to be supreme. He 
 said he was prepared to give the same to Scotland as to 
 Ireland. Scotland is to have its local Parliament too. He 
 did not mention England, because it followed of itself. 
 Mr. Gladstone's "very distinct and clear opinions" on the 
 subject, which he said he declared as long ago as 1872 at 
 Aberdeen, and the " wisdom and justice" of such a course, 
 had (he said) always been apparent to him. But if so, 
 why did he vote against Mr. Butt's motion for inquiry into 
 the subject in 1874? why did he resist Mr. Shaw's motion 
 for inquiry in 1880? His opinions were in favour of Home 
 Rule, and were " very distinct and clear " ; and yet he
 
 512 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 voted in an adverse sense. Did he do this in order to 
 hoodwink the people of England ? Was he acting like a 
 sentry who pretended to guard the fortress by night, while 
 employing all his minutes in mining underground, in order 
 to permit the ingress of the enemy ? 
 
 The journals of March 13 contained extracts from a 
 Pastoral issued by Archbishop McCabe, whom the Pope 
 had just made a Cardinal. 1 The following extracts from 
 the Pastoral were given in the Times of March 13, 1882 : 
 
 " The clergy dare not remain silent in the face of crimes 
 " which are bringing disgrace on their name and the religion 
 " of tJieir country. A decree which struck at the security 
 "of all property, and consequently exposed to peril the 
 "faith they all loved, went forth to the country some time 
 " ago, and they had seen that decree enforced by the threat 
 " of terrible penalties, and its violation punished by atroci- 
 " ties that made them shudder, even by murders, which call 
 "aloud to heaven against their perpetrators and abettors. 
 "... The injury the unhappy dupes of these associa- 
 tions inflict upon authority is probably remote and small. 
 "The injuries they inflict upon themselves are immediate 
 " and terrible. They vow obedience to an unknown authority; 
 '''they convert themselves into blind instruments for executing 
 " the decrees of an invisible and irresponsible tribunal, and 
 " they become, in the worst meaning, abject slaves. They are 
 "partners in a thousand crimes, which would fill tJieir souls 
 " with horror, could they calmly survey them ; and, having 
 "parted with their liberty by becoming members of a body 
 " sold to iniquity, they are before God and man partakers in 
 " its guilt." 
 
 The very day that this Pastoral appeared, Mr. 
 Forster, the Chief Secretary for Ireland, spoke, in the 
 House of Commons, of the " enormous number " of 
 agrarian outrages recently committed in Ireland. As he 
 had before been reticent on the subject, and had not 
 regarded the outrages as so very numerous, he clearly 
 1 St. James's Gazette, March 14.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 513 
 
 indicated that a vast increase in the number had taken 
 place. On March 14, Lord Justice Fitzgibbon said, from 
 the judicial bench in Tipperary, that, " bad as things were 
 " twelve months ago, they were twice as bad now ; " there 
 were (he said) 389 cases of outrage sent for trial, against 
 181 for the corresponding period of six months last year. 
 It must be remembered that the cases of outrage put down 
 for trial, gave no adequate idea of the outrages committed. 
 It was utterly impossible to obtain evidence enough to 
 lead to the arrest of any one, as the perpetrator of any 
 outrage which had been ordered by the Land League. 
 Even where suspicion did rest, from the clearest circum- 
 stantial evidence, on any individual, the impossibility of 
 obtaining a conviction was so well known, that it was 
 useless to apprehend. 
 
 Already the gaols were choked with prisoners. Between 
 600 and 700 "suspects" had been arrested under " Lettres 
 " de Cachet" and remained in prison without trial. For the 
 Chief Secretary, Mr. Forster, said on March 10, that " one 
 "of the officials had told him that, if 500 men were 
 "brought to give evidence against the criminals, they 
 " would not be convicted." Moreover, whatever testimony 
 might be adduced at the trial, no jury could be found to 
 convict. Some, at least, nay, the majority, if not all, were 
 sure to be steadfast in breaking their oaths and forswear- 
 ing themselves. It would have been supposed that, under 
 the circumstances, the Government would have used their 
 own judgment in the matter. Having determined to arrest 
 none but those on whom the gravest suspicion rested, 
 they would have kept those persons, at least, in durance 
 vile, until a fair trial could have been procured ? Far 
 otherwise ; as the following letters, printed in the Times 
 of March 16, from the Tuam News, will show : 
 
 "The following letters have been received from Pat 
 " Gilligan, Tyaquin, and James Coen, Clough, two of those 
 " who were arrested on Tuesday week (28th of February). 
 " Pat Gilligan's letter will banish, from the minds of thpse 
 
 L L
 
 514 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " who know him, any of those foolish fears wrongly enter- 
 "tained by them of being sent to gaol. All the young 
 "boys around Tyaquin and Clough are vexed that such 
 " a privilege should be given to those who were arrested, 
 " and that others were left behind : 
 
 " 'Monaghan Gaol, March 2, 1882. 
 
 "' My dearest Honor, I write you these few lines to let 
 " ' you know that you need not be a bit uneasy about me. 
 " ' We have very good times here ; plenty of the best to eat 
 " ' and drink ; lots of amusement. If I was to tell you the 
 ' ' whole of it, every one round there would soon apply for 
 " ' a ticket to get themselves in. Thomas Coen is here 
 " ' with me, and is well. When they are sending him some 
 " ' clothes, you can send mine too. Let me know if there 
 " ' is any news, and I hope you will not be uneasy about 
 " ' me, as I am grandly off, and would only like to be taken 
 " ' up again. 
 
 " ' I remain, your affectionate husband, 
 
 " ' PATRICK GILLIGAN.' 
 
 " ' Kilkenny, March I, 1882. 
 
 " ' My dear Father and Mother, I write to let you 
 " ' know that I arrived here about 1 1 o'clock to-day in 
 " ' good spirits. I was immediately supplied with some- 
 " ' thing to eat, and then, after an hour, dinner was served 
 " ' up to us that was fit for the first gentleman in the land. 
 " ' At dinner we got a bottle of stout, which serves as a 
 " ' wash down. By special dispensation we are allowed to 
 " ' eat any kind of food meat as often as we like, and eggs 
 " ' and butter. 1 I have a very comfortable cell to sleep in. 
 "'It is 15 ft. long by 7 ft. wide, and 10 ft. high. It has 
 " ' a good-sized window. It is as comfortable and as warm 
 '"as I could wish. In the room there is a nice metal bed- 
 " ' stead, mattress, and excellent clean bed-clothes, a nice 
 " ' table, chair, and looking-glass. We can retire to bed 
 
 1 It being Lent, the " special dispensation " was given of course 
 by the priest.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 515 
 
 '"at 8 o'clock, and we get up at 7 or 8. As for society, 
 " ' there is no want of the gayest, most light-hearted, and 
 "'merriest. . . . The people at home have no idea of tJte 
 " ' merriment we have ; it would nearly rise you from death 
 " ' to life. 
 
 " ' I remain, your affectionate son, 
 
 '" JAMES COEN.'" 
 
 In contrast with the comfort and peaceful happiness of 
 the life of an Irish rebel, when in gaol, were the horrors in 
 the lives of unoffending citizens at large. It seemed as if 
 the Government wished to provide a haven of rest for the 
 worst rebels, in order to induce the others to enter that 
 malefic race where all run, but few will wear the crown. 
 The following description of the state of Ireland was given 
 in the Times of March 20 : 
 
 " The condition of the country, as revealed during the 
 " past week in the reports from the Assizes, arrests, and 
 "number of crimes and outrages perpetrated in several 
 " districts, is beginning to call forth an expression of horror 
 " and alarm even from quarters in which, until recently, it 
 " had been represented in a favourable light. . . . Some 
 " persons go so far as to assert that the measures taken by 
 "the Government for the repression of disorder, have abso- 
 " lutely broken down ; and others argue that the outrages 
 " are tJie natural result of the exceptional measures employed 
 " to prevent them. With this theory in view, they are now 
 " ready to admit any amount of violence and anarchy. . . . 
 "Not only do the calendars furnished to the judges repre- 
 " sent only a fractional part of the criminality of the 
 "country, but the number of cases in which justice has 
 " been vindicated has been comparatively trifling." 
 
 The evident aim of Mr. Gladstone if we may judge 
 from the facts was to starve or drive the Protestant land- 
 lords out of Ireland. This was a step to the constitution 
 of a separate Roman Catholic country. 
 
 During the beginning of the session of 1882, Mr. Glad- 
 stone very speedily lost power and influence. His under-
 
 5i6 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 taking to gag the House of Commons, and to bring the 
 House of Lords into contempt by his vote of censure, was 
 too arduous a task even for one of Mr. Gladstone's genius. 
 Some other instrument had, therefore, to be prepared to 
 carry on the task. At the beginning of March, 1882, when 
 the Irish landlords were at their wits' ends, and were 
 crying out for justice, and immediately after the Wednes- 
 day's debate on the Bill to amend the Land Act, Mr. 
 Smith gave notice of a motion to enable the State to 
 create a peasant proprietary by the sale of all estates in 
 Ireland. In that Wednesday's debate Mr. Plunket and 
 Sir Michael Beach had urged on the Government the 
 necessity of an extension of Mr. Bright's "purchase 
 " clauses " in the Land Act. Lord Cairns had already done 
 the same in the debate which took place on the motion for 
 the Committee, in the House of Lords. The Conservative 
 party had evidently been worked upon to take the place of 
 Mr. Gladstone, and to carry out the policy of Tyrconnel. 
 
 On March 23, the Daily Telegraph expressed its unbound- 
 ed astonishment that the territorial aristocracy of Great 
 Britain should endeavour to trump the " Bright clauses " ; 
 outflanking the Philosophical Radicals, pushing agrarian 
 reform beyond Mr. Cobden's wildest dreams, and repeat- 
 ing with glibness and relish the often-abjured lesson of 
 Mr. John Stuart Mill. The Daily Telegraph ascribed this 
 marvellous change to "the whirligig of time," and the 
 desire of Irish landlords to be sold out and get altogether 
 quit of Ireland and its anarchy. It suggested, also, that 
 Sir Stafford Northcote should move for the release of Mr. 
 Parnell, in order that the chieftain of the Land League 
 might second the motion of Mr. W. H. Smith. Mr. 
 Joseph Cowen took a similar line in the Newcastle 
 Chronicle, and complained that Irishmen had been put in 
 prison for advocating a scheme which the Conservative 
 party would themselves propose. 
 
 Of course the motion would be supported by all the 
 Irish party and by many Liberals ? What then ? If Mr.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 517 
 
 Gladstone were beaten, the Conservative party would come 
 in, already pledged to complete the Tyrconnel policy ; if 
 Mr. Gladstone should be victorious, he would complete it 
 himself, and would be able to count upon Conservative 
 support in doing so. A very cunning manoeuvre ! A very 
 subtle and astute device ! The pudding-headed Tory 
 Cabinet could not have devised it. It could not have been 
 spun out of the head ot"Tete tfetoupe" ycleped Sir Staf- 
 ford Northcote, with the whole front bench to aid him ! 
 The monstrous intrigue for ruining the Protestant land- 
 lords, and wading through blood to an autonomous Ro- 
 manist Irish State, was the conception of others, outside 
 of Parliament, whose brains had long been practised in 
 the intricate combinations of intrigue ; whose hearts had 
 long since been hardened against human sympathy ; whose 
 souls had been thoroughly stained with crime ; and whose 
 hands were still reeking with blood. 
 
 It was they who had concocted the plot. Both sides of 
 the House were the slaves who were compelled to carry it 
 out. The plot having been concocted, and the plans laid, 
 the Conservative party were ordered to announce their 
 policy of going beyond Mr. Gladstone's Land Act and 
 capping his Land League. The Liberals were then ordered 
 to trump the Conservative card. In preparation for these 
 moves Mr. Gladstone, on April 4, just before the Easter 
 recess, made a speech of despondency and wailing despair. 
 He acknowledged implicitly, if not explicitly, the utter 
 failure of the Land Act, and proclaimed the inability of 
 the Government to cope with those evils in Ireland, which 
 the Government themselves had fomented. He recalled 
 to the memory of the House " the remarkable declaration 
 "of the Duke of Wellington, that warning which he gave 
 "to King George IV., that if ever the time came when 
 " there was a war against rent, the Government would be 
 " reduced to extremities, and would have no resources to 
 " bring to bear against such a movement." 
 
 The next evening, April 5, the St. James's Gazette an
 
 5i8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 evening paper, which was probably very fully informed of 
 the intrigues up to a certain point that evening paper 
 produced a remarkable article, with the evident aim of 
 leading the gentry of the country on the intended track 
 during the Easter recess. It began thus: "When, about 
 " a fortnight ago, we called attention in two articles (one 
 " entitled, ' Opposition Plans for Peasant Proprietorship ' ; 
 " the other, ' The Land Act Superseded ') to a certain 
 " movement in the Conservative party, it was not difficult 
 " to foresee that the Radical wire-pullers were about to be 
 " thrown into extreme confusion. What we then pointed 
 " out and it had passed quite unnoticed in the public 
 " prints till then was shortly this : that while every day 
 " proved more clearly that the Irish policy of the Govern- 
 " ment was a disastrous failure, and while it seemed im- 
 " possible for them to pretend to govern Ireland much 
 " longer by virtue of their Land Bill, the Conservative 
 " leaders had evidently made up their minds to force 
 "another policy, by which the legislation of last year 
 " would be virtually extinguished. The facts we pointed 
 " to were that Lord Cairns in the House of Lords, and 
 " Sir Michael Hicks-Beach in the House of Commons, and 
 " Mr. Gibson in a letter to a newspaper, had declared that 
 " the Government must find some means of attempting the 
 " pacification of Ireland by the creation of peasant pro- 
 " prietorships ; and that thereafter Mr. William Smith had 
 " given the most formal expression to this view that it was 
 " possible to give. That gentleman placed a notice of 
 " motion before the House of Commons, declaring that 
 " ' further legislation is imperatively required to enable 
 " ' tenants in Ireland to acquire the freeholds of their 
 " * holdings ' ; and this no doubt was done in concert with 
 " his colleagues in the late Cabinet. A more serious step, 
 " or one more pregnant in its consequences, can hardly be 
 " imagined. For, as we have already said, no scheme for 
 " the establishment of peasant proprietorships by State 
 " agency can be small or partial. To be of any value at
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 519 
 
 " all, it must take so wide a sweep as to be of complete and 
 " general application. But if so, it must of necessity super- 
 " sede the abortive Land Act altogether. . . . Lastly, it 
 " remains to be said that detailed plans for an Irish Peasant 
 " Proprietorship Bill have already been drawn tip. . . . 
 " Mr. Smith's most formidable motion must be trumped 
 " somehow ; and thus it is that we hear these sudden admis- 
 " sions of complete failure, and hence these cries for new 
 " legislation" 
 
 No. LXXII. 
 
 THE Times of April 13, 1882, contained the speeches of 
 Lord Salisbury and Sir Stafford Northcote in Liverpool. 
 Let us listen to the testimony of the Conservative leaders 
 the supposed opponents of Mr. Gladstone, and see how 
 they intended to carry out and further Mr. Gladstone's 
 Tyrconnel policy of freeing Ireland from the Protestant 
 landlords, so that it might be constituted as an autonomous 
 Roman Catholic State. Lord Salisbury said: "I am 
 "addressing you at a moment which, in respect to the 
 " interests of the Empire, is more grave than any to which 
 " my recollection extends. I have no need to prove it ; it 
 " is a matter of common notoriety ; it has been proved by 
 "the admission of the highest authority, the head of the 
 " Government himself, who has told us that, in respect to 
 " one portion of this kingdom, we are in the presence of 
 " that gravest malady by which any State can be afflicted 
 " in the presence of a social revolution. The announcement 
 " was made almost in a spirit of despair certainly without 
 " any consciousness that there was any connection between the 
 " achievements of the speaker and the avowal which lie Jiad 
 " made." 
 
 Did it not occur to Lord Salisbury that Mr. Gladstone 
 had made an avowal which was at once proclaimed by 
 a chorus of newspapers to have been " unfortunate," " ill- 
 advised," "incautious," "ill chosen," precisely in order 
 to encourage the Land League to make another effort for
 
 520 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 achieving success, and in order to dishearten the loyal 
 population of Ireland, and to coerce his opponents in 
 Parliament into a support of his policy ? Lord Salisbury 
 continued : " But what is a social revolution ? In the case 
 "of Ireland, and I suppose generally, it is a revolution 
 " against the laws of property. ... A social revolution 
 " is something abnormal and monstrous, against which appa- 
 " rently even his power and even his courage were in vain. 
 " Has any tiling happened that could account for this fact, that 
 " now in this day we have, for the first time, a revolutionary 
 " movement against the rights of property f You have this 
 " remarkable coincidence, that within the last few years you 
 " have had in respect to Ireland, for the first time in the 
 "history of this country, legislation hostile to the rights of 
 "property. You have had a Parliament suddenly changing 
 "the doctrine which had been upheld for centuries sud- 
 " denly setting aside the rights which, beyond the memory 
 "of man, had been acknowledged without dispute; suddenly 
 " transferring to one set of men, the property that had be- 
 " longed to another. I am not going to affix any ethical 
 " name to the transference ; there is no subject so un- 
 " pleasant as allusion to the eighth commandment, when 
 " dealing with politics. Let us abstain from qualifying the 
 "transference. The undoubted fact is, however, that one 
 "quarter of the property of a certain class, so far as the 
 " machinery has hitherto worked, has been transferred from 
 " that class to another class. Well, now, I do not refer to 
 " this for the purpose of dwelling upon this injustice that 
 " has been done and there is much to be said in respect 
 "of it but I want you to look at it from another view. 
 " Look at it in its effect of prodiicing this social revolution. 
 " If there is a movement, a successful and dangerous 
 " movement, against the laws of property, it is possible, in 
 " the first instance, that those who are all the natural defenders 
 " of property are discouraged, and are unable to defend their 
 " rights with the vigour which in other countries they exercise. 
 "The landlords of Ireland have been accused I think
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 521 
 
 "have been very ungenerously accused of feebleness in 
 "defending their own rights; but what has been their 
 " position ? They have fought between two fires ; they 
 " have had the enemy conducting the social revolution in 
 " their front, and they have had the Imperial Parliament in 
 " their rear. They have been standing, now for a dozen 
 "years, upon uncertain and shifting ground. Up to 1870, 
 " the rights of property in this country were clearly under- 
 stood and never disputed, and Parliament had never 
 "interfered with individual ownership. A new theory of 
 "property was devised in 1870, and we were told that was 
 "the final legislation with respect to land in Ireland. 
 "Eleven years of anxiety passed away, and that finality 
 " was forgotten. A new theory of property was invented, 
 "a new transference took place, and the landowners of 
 " Ireland were again driven to the conviction that there 
 "was nothing in the system or policy of the Imperial 
 " Government, in respect to property, on which they could 
 " rely. . . . And at a time when all men of all parties 
 "in this island are doing their utmost to maintain that 
 "legislative connection which we believe to be so deeply 
 "valuable for the interest of both islands, the same high 
 " authority also lets fall a set of ambiguous words, pointing 
 " to the probability of a future revisal, even of this vital 
 " question of Imperial policy. . . . Now, the effect of this 
 " ill-disguised arid thinly veiled concession to forcible agitation, 
 " has been to make up the elements of an insurrection which 
 "is encouraged by every sign of yielding on the part of the 
 " Government, by every ambiguous phrase pointing to future 
 " concessions. Now this, and this in the first rank, is the great 
 " cause of the policy of the Government in Ireland. . . . 
 " If they had from the first sat down with the intention of 
 "pursuing a policy which should, above every other policy, 
 " succeed in the disorganization of society, in promoting and 
 "bringing about a social revolution, they could not have 
 " devised a more effectual policy of vacillation and oscillation 
 " than that they have actually pursued."
 
 522 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Here Lord Salisbury distinctly charged Mr. Gladstone 
 with having himself brought about, and then promoted, 
 the very social revolution which he had seemed to deplore. 
 That was all very good. But Lord Salisbury, having 
 shown that Mr. Gladstone had brought about a social 
 revolution, did not suggest that the revolution should be 
 put down. Having proved that Mr. Gladstone had nearly 
 expatriated the Irish landlords, in order to " revise the 
 " legislative connection between England and Ireland," he 
 did not propose that the landlords should be reinstated, 
 and their rights defended. On the contrary, he advised 
 that Mr. Gladstone should be assisted, and that Mr. 
 Gladstone's Tyrconnel policy should be continued and 
 furthered. He said : " The Irish Land Act established a 
 " species of ownership in land, which has never been tried 
 " in any country in the world before ; and, as mankind has, 
 " for an indefinite number of years, had to do with the 
 " ownership and occupation of land, it is highly improbable 
 " that in this time, and with our present light of the ex- 
 " perience of the human race, such a totally new scheme of 
 " ownership and tenancy can succeed. . . . The most subtle 
 " ingenuity could not have devised a method more perfectly 
 "certain to secure that landlord and tenant slwuld remain on 
 " bad terms till fifteen years had expired. For myself, I 
 " believe that the Land Act will have to be altered, and 
 " think it can only be altered in one direction. / am not 
 " one of those who believe that, after a revolutionary step, you 
 " can go back. It is one of the curses of revolution, that it 
 "separates you by a chasm from the past which you 
 " have left, a chasm which you never can recross. If you 
 " wish to establish peace and contentment in Ireland, you 
 " must do your best to bring the ownership of land again 
 "into single hands. You will see that I am referring to 
 "the proposal notice of which has been given by my 
 " distinguished friend, Mr. William Henry Smith for 
 " increasing those powers, under which the Commissioners 
 " can now act for enabling Irish tenants to become, with
 
 TO CLUE THEIR SOLUTION. 523 
 
 "perfect fairness and justice to their present landlords, 
 " themselves the owners of their lands. I am well aware 
 " this is a great undertaking, and I could have wished 
 " that it had been begun earlier. . . . Radicalism has 
 " done its utmost to hound the classes against each other 
 "in England. Great efforts have been made to set the 
 "occupiers of land against owners, and the labourers of the 
 " land against both. The same efforts, for a longer time, 
 " have been devoted to Ireland, upon a more favourable 
 " field, and you now see the result ; the disintegration, the 
 " kindling of the animosity of classes has there had its 
 " perfect work, AND THE SOCIAL REVOLUTION IS ALL BUT 
 " COMPLETE." 
 
 The kindling of animosity in the minds of the Roman 
 Catholic peasantry of Ireland, against the Protestant owners 
 of land, of which Mr. Gladstone had been the instrument, 
 had made the social revolution all but complete ! That 
 was my Lord Salisbury's avowal. And Lord Salisbury 
 proposed to perfect Mr. Gladstone's work. Now hear Sir 
 Stafford Northcote : " At this moment we are threatened 
 " with these evils ; we are threatened with the social revolu- 
 " tion, of which we have heard ; we are threatened, not only 
 " with a social, but, perhaps, through that, with a political 
 " revolution. We know how some of those who have been 
 " the guiding spirits in the events that we have lately seen 
 " in Ireland, have declared openly that they would not 
 " have gone into this matter, if they had not seen some- 
 " thing far beyond the immediate cry which they were 
 " raising. We know how their leader, in expressive, though 
 " homely terms, told us that he would not ' have taken off 
 " ' his coat ' for this, unless he thought it would pave the 
 " way for the disruption of the Empire and the casting off of 
 " the connection of England. Whatever may be the distinc- 
 " tion which you choose to draw between the social revolu- 
 " tion and the political revolution, in this case the two are 
 " united, and form the common object of those who are engaged 
 " in this business. If that is so, and if England is exposed
 
 524 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " to these serious dangers, must we not ask, Where are we 
 " to look for our means of defence ? Hitherto we should 
 " have had no difficulty in showing that the Houses 
 " of Parliament were the Constitutional bulwarks of the 
 " country, and that, in the maintenance of tJie independence 
 " and of the vigour of character of these two Houses, our real 
 " road to safety was to be discovered. But is that so now ? 
 " Can we say that with the same confidence, when we see 
 "the manner in which those who should be the guardians 
 " of our independence, those who should be our leaders in the 
 "work of fortifying the Constitution against all attacks, are 
 " endeavouring to ^veaken and to discourage and to disparage 
 " those great institutions to which we look for our safety" 
 
 So, Sir Stafford ! you see dimly the connecting links 
 between the parts of Mr. Gladstone's policy ! Social revo- 
 lution in Ireland, and then the separation of Ireland from 
 England on the one hand ; and then you spoke of the 
 degradation of the House of Lords, and the gagging of the 
 House of Commons, to prevent interference with his evil 
 work ! But if you perceived that, however dimly, I ask 
 you, were calmly muttered words, and milksop phrases, 
 the proper exponents of your feelings ? We expected the 
 fiery words of indignation, rage, and proud defiance at 
 least, if you had no means of resistance to indicate. He 
 continued : " We know pretty well that its strength is 
 " derived from the unwholesome and dangerous institute 
 " which has become, unfortunately, known among us by 
 " the name of the Caucus. The Caucus is the tool of the 
 " Prime Minister, for the purpose of putting constraint upon 
 " the consciences of his supporters. It is that Caucus which, 
 " no doubt, he has found in times past to be a very useful 
 " servant ; but which I venture to say he will find, and the 
 " Government will find, to be a most dangerous master." 
 
 Still the calmly muttered words, the absence of inflexion 
 of voice, of expression of the face, of gesture in the limbs ! 
 You speak of the degraded character of the House of Com- 
 mons, and of its cause, the Caucus in the boroughs, with
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 525 
 
 less feeling than you would tell of bots in a sheep, or farcy 
 in a cart-horse ! He continued : " Lord Salisbury referred 
 " just now to the examples that we have had from foreign 
 "countries. I think that there are many things in the 
 " history of the French Revolution, a century ago, which we 
 " may well take to our hearts, and consider as warnings 
 " specially addressed to us. There was the same outburst of 
 " social revolution, there was the same attack upon property, 
 " there was the same setting of class against class. But this 
 "you have to notice. If you study the history of that time, 
 " you will see that the evil work was done very much at the in- 
 " stigation of a small minority of the people, a small minority 
 " in point of numbers, but still organized and unscrupulous in 
 " the use of their means ; and they were not resisted." 
 
 Then Sir Stafford continued in the voice and with the 
 manner of a schoolboy repeating his Propria qua maribus : 
 " The state of Ireland is most serious, and it has become so 
 " within the last two years, and under the direct effect of the 
 " measures which the Government Jtave taken. From the 
 " figures I have here, which were taken from the return that 
 " was presented at the close of last year, I see that, in the 
 " six years during which the late Government held office, 
 " there were in all 1,961 cases of agrarian outrage, or an 
 " average of 327 in the year. In the single year 1880, that 
 " average number of 327 was turned into 2,589, or more 
 " than the whole number in the six years of the Conservative 
 " administration. But in the following year what do we 
 " see ? In 1881 the outrages had risen from the average of 
 " 327 to the fearful and appalling total of 4>4395 and among 
 " those 4,439 cases of agrarian outrage, I see it on record 
 " that only 204 convictions had been obtained, and there 
 " were 88 prisoners awaiting trial." 
 
 Before turning to Lord Salisbury's speech of the next 
 day, let us recall some of the points in the above : the dis- 
 closure of the possibility of further concessions to the Irish 
 agitators, could not have failed to keep agitation alive ; the 
 despondent attitude of the Government, and the avowal
 
 526 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 that the Social Revolution was too strong for them, must 
 have added courage to hope, and stimulated the agitation 
 into activity. The Land Act had been so framed as to 
 preclude a cessation of the agitation, both by means of the 
 block in the Land Courts, and the divided ownership in the 
 land. Lord Hartington had, as Lord Salisbury reminded 
 his hearers, just before borne out this view, by asserting 
 that the work of the land Commissioners had been intended 
 only to lead up to the creation of a peasant proprietary. 
 Lord Salisbury next announced that he would not be a 
 party to retracing their steps, but would swim on with the 
 revolutionary tide, and help to extend the provisions of the 
 Act by supporting Mr. Smith's resolution ; that he would 
 do his best to expatriate the Irish landlords, by putting 
 a pseudo-Catholic peasantry in their places ! 
 
 On this point let us recall the action of the Irish 
 Romanist bishops throughout this conspiracy. It shall be 
 given in the words of a letter from " an Irish Catholic," 
 which appeared in the Times of April 14. "Cardinal 
 " McCabe condemned outrages. He has stood out as a 
 " bright star among our Catholic bishops in Ireland, and, on 
 " every occasion that offered, has denounced the murderous 
 " tendencies of the Land League ; but, sir, can we say as 
 " much for the remainder of our bishops ? I fear not. Some 
 " have, in a feeble way, spoken against outrages ; but others 
 " have openly supported the Land League, which many people 
 " think originated the outrages and the many foul crimes 
 " that have latterly disgraced our unfortunate country. 
 
 "I have not heard of the Catholic Bishop of Meath 
 "having publicly in his diocese denounced this last foul 
 "and barbarous murder of Mrs. Smythe at Barbavilla. 
 " Surely he cannot be callous to such an atrocious crime, 
 " committed within a few miles of his Episcopal See at 
 " Mullingar ? Why does he not ' thunder forth ' a pastoral 
 " letter on this subject as strong in language as many he 
 " has before written on political subjects, and have it in 
 " like manner read from the altars of the many chapels of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 527 
 
 " his diocese ? Why have our Irish bishops not jointly, 
 " openly, and fearlessly spoken out at this crisis f Why have 
 " they left this arduous duty almost alone to be done by one of 
 "their number? A great many of us Catholics feel con- 
 " vinced that had they done this some time ago, distracted 
 " Ireland would not have been in quite such a terrible state 
 " as she now is, and that the blood of some of the many 
 " victims might have been saved." 
 
 Let us now read Lord Salisbury's second speech, at 
 Liverpool : * " Now, it is a very odd thing that one of the 
 " accusations against the Government and an accusation 
 " which I do not venture to say here was true or false, for 
 " I do not know but the accusation constantly made was, 
 " that they had appointed the Sub-commissioners of the Irish 
 " Land Act with a partisan intention; that is to say, they 
 " had appointed men of well-known opinions, whose de- 
 " cisions they could predict before the Act was passed. 
 " You know what the construction of the Land Act was. 
 " The Government tried very much not to go into details ; 
 " but at last, despairing of inducing Parliament to take the 
 "view which they preferred, they passed a clause placing 
 " the absolute power in the hands of Commissioners and 
 " Sub-commissioners to decide what the rent of the land- 
 lord should be, not laying down any kind of principle 
 " whatever to guide them in their decision. Of course, 
 "you will see it was essential in the circumstances that 
 " men should have been appointed who were of absolutely 
 " fair minds, who leaned neither to the one side nor to the 
 " other, who had no prejudice in favour of the landlord and 
 " no prejudice in favour of the tenant ; and, therefore, it was 
 " a very grave accusation indeed that, in particular cases, 
 " men had been appointed who had been on public platforms 
 " evincing' their strong sympathy with one side of the qucs- 
 " tion, and whose decisions, therefore, could have been pro- 
 " phesied beforehand" 
 
 Alluding to Mr. Gladstone, Lord Salisbury avowed that : 
 1 Times, April 14.
 
 5=8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " He has stimulated the malady into a dangerous and 
 " painful state of aggravation. That is what has happened. 
 " I believe that it was in this town that the celebrated gospel 
 " of the Upas-tree was first broached. It was here that that 
 "fatal policy was announced, of which we have the latest 
 " results in the terrible outrages which have thrilled through 
 " the heart and conscience of England." 
 
 There ! Lord Salisbury, whether he knew or not the 
 extent of the proposition which he announced, at last 
 made a thrust home, under Mr. Gladstone's guard ! If he 
 knew what he was saying, why did he, almost in the same 
 breath, announce that he would carry Mr. Gladstone's 
 policy still further ? It had been seen that Mr. Gladstone 
 was already too much weakened in public estimation to 
 carry it out himself; why, then, did Lord Salisbury pledge 
 himself and his party to a continuance of that policy ? If, 
 on the other hand, Lord Salisbury did not know what he 
 was saying, then he was like a man who fired shots at 
 random in the dark, and, by a lucky chance, wounded his 
 enemy mortally, without any credit to his expertness or 
 correctness of aim. 
 
 Had Lord Salisbury considered what it involved to 
 carry out Mr. Gladstone's policy ? Putting aside all know- 
 ledge of the Tyrconnel intrigue ; forgetting even the 
 declarations of the agitators and Land Leaguers them- 
 selves, could he not see for himself what it would lead to ? 
 He doubtless did not mean to fire a blank cartridge ! he 
 did not intend to establish a peasant proprietary only here 
 and there, but over the whole country ! What landlord 
 would then care to remain in that damp, uninteresting 
 country ? Every landlord (being only a holder of land- 
 consols) would be an absentee. All the landlords were 
 certain to disappear from Ireland. With them would dis- 
 appear, also, all the middle classes that depended upon 
 them. Tyrconnel's desire would have been accomplished. 
 The Protestants would have been violently swept out of 
 the land.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 529 
 
 Let us, however, look at the other side. Those land- 
 lords, with their land-consols, or Government debentures 
 (the price of their land), would live in England or abroad, 
 and spend there, and not in Ireland, the incomes they 
 received. The Irish tenants, moreover, would, for forty 
 years, pay, not to landlords, but to the English Treasury, 
 the judicial rents of their holdings. That money also 
 would go out of Ireland. To that state would Lord Salis- 
 bury bring Ireland, in continuation of Mr. Gladstone's 
 policy ! Poor and disappointed, with no money in the 
 country to give employment, the whole country would be 
 seething and ripe for revolution. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone fostered and gratified their hatred for 
 landlords. He said the English State should be their 
 landlord. Would not, in that case, the rule of England 
 be hated still more bitterly than now it is? Mr. Glad- 
 stone granted them the Land Act as a step to auto- 
 nomy. Would not autonomy, nay, even the rule of 
 America, be a hundred-fold more eagerly embraced than 
 that of England ? If " no rent " were to be proclaimed, 
 with the State as landlord, either the State must prove 
 a more ruthless, harsh, and inexorable landlord than 
 any of the expatriated landlords used to be ; or else the 
 State must relax its grasp of the rents in Ireland, and 
 make John Bull bleed freely for the support of the Irish 
 and their Peasant Proprietary Act That would be neces- 
 sary in order to meet the dividends on the new land- 
 consols, and avoid a national bankruptcy. Yet that would 
 rouse the bitterest hatred between English and Irish. 
 Even the Peasant Proprietary Act would be hated ; for 
 the Irish would look back and remember that they were 
 before enabled to live in bad seasons, by indulgent land- 
 lords, relaxations of rent, kind and tender solicitude. Then 
 would come a general election ; and, both in England and 
 Ireland, those would be elected men who pledged them- 
 selves to sweep away that stupid Parliament of England. 
 The "judicial rents," by an understanding beforehand 
 
 M M
 
 530 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 between the Commissioners and the Government or others, 
 as to what the sentences should be, had already enor- 
 mously reduced the rents. Let us suppose that the State, 
 at Mr. Gladstone's instance, should consent to defraud 
 itself, and reduce the rents still more, for the operation 
 of the Peasant Proprietary Act. The tenants, let us say, 
 agree to pay a very reduced rent for forty years, and will 
 then own the fee-simple. But the tenant will at once 
 perceive that the tenant-right will have been enormously 
 increased by the Act. It would be worth any one's 
 while, on the passing of the Peasant Proprietary Act, to 
 give double the normal tenant-right, in order to obtain 
 the land so cheap. Thus the incoming tenants of Ireland 
 would not only be paupers, but would be in the grip of 
 the village Jew and money-lender. A farm of mine had 
 only eleven years of lease to run. The widow of the 
 tenant asked my leave to sell the lease ; and she obtained 
 for it twenty-seven years' purchase of the rent. How many 
 years' purchase of the rental would have been given for the 
 fee-simple? Perhaps twenty. Then the profit of the 
 tenant was to the profit of the landlord as twenty-seven 
 to twenty. Nay more ; for the landlord had to pay tithe- 
 rent charge, and county cess, and main drainage out of the 
 smaller share which he received of his own property. The 
 tenants were already in a far better position than their 
 landlords ! 
 
 Mr. Gladstone broke faith with those landlords who had 
 received a Parliamentary title in the Landed Estates 
 Court ; he broke faith with all the landlords in destroying 
 the finality of the Act of 1870 ; he had evinced his capacity 
 for legalized spoliation and plunder, and who would be 
 then so mad as to trust him in the future ? Yet the 
 Times, on April 24, could complacently write the follow- 
 ing in its leading article : " However fully we concede 
 " that all that has been done, has been justly done and 
 " properly ; and that every sentence that has been pro- 
 ** nounced (by the Land Courts) can, in some unknown
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 531 
 
 " way, be defended as the copy of a higher law ; yet the 
 " practical objections to the working of the fair rent clauses 
 "remain. The Irish landlord, whose rent has been thus 
 " fixed for him, has been so far deprived of his proprietary 
 "rights, that he has no- longer the inducement, or the 
 " power, to discharge his proprietary duties. He has become 
 "a mere rent-charger, a mere encumbrancer on the land. 
 "He has lost all interest in improvements. For fifteen 
 "years he is to receive, or to have a claim to receive, a 
 " certain annual sum of money. He can exercise no choice 
 " as to the tenant from whom it is to* be due. His property 
 " may, in effect, be sold away from him, subject to the 
 "charge he has upon it He fulfils no function except 
 " that of receiving such rent as- he can obtain. His care 
 " for the land, and for the people in occupation of it, has 
 " been most effectually destroyed. The next step would be 
 " that he should disappear from the scene altogether'' The 
 subject of that leading article was the declaration of 
 Lord Salisbury, at Liverpool, in favour of Mr. W. H. 
 Smith's motion for the $th of May. 
 
 While Resolutions in the House were all the talk of 
 English Society, Revolutions in Ireland were the deeds of 
 the Government in that unhappy country. Mr. O'Connor 
 Power, one of the chief actors in a subordinate capacity, 
 stepped from behind the scenes to address the House, on 
 April 20 : " As soon as the land agitation had reached 
 " national proportions, he felt that a revolution was ap- 
 " proaching, and his attitude was shaped by his recollection 
 " of what had happened in other countries on the occurrence 
 " of great popular reactions to overthrow systems opposed 
 " to the well-being of those countries. A revolution was 
 "going on in Ireland there could be no doubt about that ; 
 " and though it might be made by tJie Land League, it was 
 " not provoked by the Land League. The men wJw provoked 
 " revolutions usually belonged to one class, and tJie men who 
 " made them to another"
 
 532 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 NO. LXXIII. 
 
 A STRONG instinct had developed itself in the Conserva- 
 tive party against Mr. Smith's motion ; and rumours had got 
 about that Mr. Smith would not propose his motion at all. 
 The World of April 25 not only noticed this fact, but also 
 divined the aims of Mr. Gladstone's action. After assert- 
 ing that Mr. Smith would not venture to bring forward 
 his resolution, because of its unpopularity with the Con- 
 servative party ; it proceeded to argue as follows : " On 
 " Wednesday (April 26) Mr. Gladstone will probably avail 
 "himself of the introduction of Mr. Healy's Land Law 
 " Amendment Bill, in the House of Commons, to make a 
 " statement as to the future Irish policy of the Government 
 " He will announce his intention of amending and expand- 
 " ing, not only the purchase clauses, but the arrears and 
 " emigration clauses of the Act. After this, Mr. Smith can 
 " gain nothing by persevering with his resolution. . . . 
 "The truth is, Mr. Smith has tried to play the game of the 
 " Irish landlords. But though the landlords would gain by 
 "being bought up, their disestablishment would sever the 
 "last connecting link between Ireland and England. Mr. 
 " Parnell has never disguised the fact that the abolition of 
 " landlordism is with him only a means to an end the end 
 " being Hibernian autonomy. From whatever point of view, 
 "therefore, it is looked at, one must consider Mr. Smith's 
 " scheme a false move. But it is insanity for the Conser- 
 " vatives to think of giving effect even to a portion of the 
 " programme at a heavy cost to the English taxpayer, to 
 " say nothing of a violent blow to the British Constitution. 
 "Lord Beaconsfield, if he had lived, might very probably have 
 " brought about a coalition between the Conservatives and the 
 "Home Rulers ere this ; but he would have done it with 
 "more adroitness than Mr. Smith." 
 
 The whole world was, of course, on the tiptoe of expec- 
 tation on Wednesday, the 26th of April. The House was 
 crowded throughout, with members anxious to hear Mr.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 533 
 
 Gladstone's expected statement. Will he refuse to advance, 
 think you, in obedience to the demands of the Ultramon- 
 tane party in Ireland ? If so, he will be beaten on Smith's 
 motion and have to resign, and the Conservatives will have 
 to carry out the Gladstonian policy of Irish autonomy. 
 No ; he will not be beaten, because there will be so large 
 a defection of Conservatives, there will even be an active 
 hostility on their part. He will therefore not put it in the 
 power of the recalcitrants to evince their enlightened 
 hostility. Will he, then, take the wind out of Mr. Smith's 
 sails, by promising to undertake all, or more than all, that 
 Mr. Smith pretends to desire ? No ; because the Conser- 
 vative party would then not be committed to the policy. 
 So reasoned those who possessed the key to Mr. Gladstone's 
 policy. The event proved the correctness of their reason- 
 ing. Mr. Gladstone spoke, spoke many words, and scarcely 
 said anything. What ! had he nothing to say on those 
 topics which have sprung out of six months' experience of 
 the working of the Land Act ? Nothing to propose for 
 " meeting the present movement of the Irish masses for 
 " the dispossession of the landlords, and the disruption of 
 " the Union ? (as the Times most naively asked, the next 
 morning.) No! "his expressions (said the Times) may 
 " not be unfairly interpreted to mean that he is looking to 
 " his opponents for the suggestion of a policy." 
 
 Mr. Gibson complained of Mr. Gladstone's attempt to di- 
 vide the responsibility, by inviting suggestions from the Con- 
 servatives ; but he did not see the reason which had forced 
 Mr. Gladstone to do so. He complained of Mr. Gladstone's 
 use of " vague and doubtful language," when Mr. Gladstone 
 might have learned by experience that lawless demands 
 are stimulated by such exhibitions of weakness ; but Mr. 
 Gibson was not aware that Mr. Gladstone's aim might have 
 been to stimulate the agitation, in order to force the people 
 of England into a surrender. What was it to Mr. Gladstone, 
 or to his Ultramontane friends, that Ireland should have 
 become, under their management, the break in the dyke
 
 534 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 which had commenced the " letting in of the waters " of 
 Socialism ? What cared they that the disorder was con- 
 tagious, and that communistic principles had begun to take 
 root in Scotland and England, from whence the seed 
 would surely be wafted to the Continental countries, 
 where the soil had been so well prepared to receive it, but 
 where property was, as yet, defended by law ? What cared 
 they if the pestilence should spread, if Governments should 
 be weakened by democratic principles, if Constitutions 
 should be shattered by destruction of the rights of property ? 
 The false prophet can "almost deceive the very elect," and 
 completely deceive those that are not elect ; but a fearful 
 falling away from Christianity will assuredly be the con- 
 sequence. 
 
 The telegram from Dublin, which was given in the Times 
 (May 3), was far from reassuring. It professed to describe 
 the state of opinion in Ireland. " The prospect is regarded 
 " with despondency and alarm. There is nothing in the 
 " present condition of the country to warrant an expectation 
 " that the letting loose of the leaders, whose agitation has 
 " so deeply infected the community with disloyalty and 
 " dishonesty, will produce a magical change and transform 
 " the people into law-abiding citizens. On the contrary, 
 " there is too much reason to fear that a fresh stimulus will 
 " be given to lawlessness, and that ' Captain Moonlight ' 
 " will receive a new commission and be promoted to higher 
 " honours and authority. The result of the secret embassy 
 u to Kilmainham is now revealed, although the utmost care 
 " had been taken to prevent the keenest curiosity from pene- 
 " trating the mystery. It may some day form the subject 
 " of an interesting chapter of political romance, that the 
 " scene of a Cabinet Council was changed from Downing 
 " Street to Kilmainham, and that the head of the Govern- 
 " ment at Whitehall, in a great crisis, suspended the con- 
 " ference of his chief advisers, in order to await the return of 
 " a confidential plenipotentiary to the premier of the Land 
 " League Government."
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 535 
 
 What if the mysterious ambassador to Mr. Parnell, 
 the uncrowned king of Ireland was sent to say : " Now, 
 "at last, the moment has arrived when we can carry 
 " out our secret policy ! the agitation, the outrages, the 
 "terrorism, which we have maintained, have met with 
 " success ; and we can now force Great Britain to grant 
 " Home Rule to Ireland, and a fully accredited ambas- 
 " sador to the Pope. You, and the other suspects, must 
 "now come out of gaol and help us. We will make 
 "Forster resign, and will appoint, as Chief Secretary, 
 " some one who knows nothing of Ireland ; one who will 
 " be as soft clay in the fingers ; one whom we can easily 
 " knead into any shape. Rejoice then, oh Jesuits, Fenians, 
 " Socialists, with the whole posse comitatiis of your ignorant 
 " dupes, called agitators and Land Leaguers ! Rejoice ! 
 " shout ! light your bonfires on every hill ; for we have, 
 " at last gained the victory of two centuries ! The shades 
 "of the Stuarts, with their agent, Tyrconnel, may too 
 " rejoice, if there be possibility of joy in the regions where 
 " they are ! " 
 
 When Mr. Parnell was arrested in October last, Mr. 
 Gladstone, at the Guildhall thus announced the fact, and 
 the grounds for it : " Within these few moments I have 
 "been informed that, towards the vindication of law, of 
 " order, of the rights of property, of the freedom of the land, 
 " of the first elements of political life and civilization, the 
 " first step has been taken in the arrest of the man who 
 "has made himself beyond all otlurs prominent in tJie 
 " attempt to destroy the authority of the law, and to substi- 
 " tute what would end in being nothing more nor less than 
 " anarchical oppression exercised upon the people of 
 " Ireland." 
 
 Mr. Parnell, along with Dillon, O'Kelly, Michael Davitt, 
 and many other leaders, were set free ; and all that Mr. 
 Gladstone could say in excuse was : " In our belief it is 
 " advisable in the interests of law, order, and the security 
 " of property in Ireland." If the freedom of Parnell and
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Co. was incompatible with the observance of the law, the 
 maintenance of order, the authority of the Queen, and the 
 safety of life and property in Ireland, why should he have 
 been enlarged before order had been restored, and at the 
 very time that the Government had relinquished the 
 powers which were necessary to maintain that order ? 
 Why should the Government have reverted to that state of 
 things which they had found before to be so intolerable ? 
 Why should they have beaten an ignominious retreat from 
 the position they had hitherto held ? Why should they 
 hope to resist the forces of anarchy, flushed with victory 
 and in possession of the hardly contested strongholds, 
 when they quailed before the same adversary while he was 
 dispirited and apparently powerless ? Or was the supposed 
 adversary really no opponent at all, but an ally and 
 accomplice ? Was the battle a sham fight, maintained as 
 an excuse for yielding those very strong places ? Was the 
 policy of the Government a farce, and were their protes- 
 tations but lies ? 
 
 The feeble censure of the Times, on May 4, was amusing. 
 It said : " It is not pleasant to contemplate the possibilities 
 " which this involves. The Ministry, however, have staked 
 "everything upon the hope that Ireland can be reconciled 
 " by meeting the demands of Mr. Parnell's party at least 
 " half-way, and it is as well that, since the experiment is 
 " to be tried, it should not be hampered by futile efforts to 
 "keep up the pretence of a vigorous struggle against Irish 
 " lawlessness." 
 
 In other words, the Times hinted the doctrine that the 
 repression of lawlessness had failed ; that repression and 
 conciliation could not go together ; and that the Ministry 
 must abandon their sham struggle against lawlessness, and 
 grant those demands for Irish autonomy, which had re- 
 peatedly been made by Mr. Parnell and his party ! 
 
 The attitude of the French Ultramontane organ the 
 Jesuits' paper, the Univers, was remarkable. The Univers, 
 on May 3 : " Exulted over the resolution of the Canadian
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 537 
 
 " House of Commons, advocated an Irish Parliament, de- 
 " scribed the Government as now accepting Mr. Parnell's 
 " much-denounced scheme, and predicted a new era for 
 " the heroic country of St. Patrick and O'Connell ' Ireland 
 " ' will henceforth advance with rapid strides towards com- 
 " ' plete enfranchisement! " 
 
 The Roman Catholic Monde, observed that : * " Mr. 
 " Gladstone was consciously or unconsciously undermining 
 " a Constitution which had made England a great and 
 " powerful nation ; . . . and though foggy Albion con- 
 " tains strong elements of resistance to anarchy, yet the 
 " flag of disorder was seen waving on the summit of the 
 " ancient British citadel ; and no one can avoid sad fore- 
 "bodings." 
 
 The same Jesuit influence was to be seen in Ireland. 
 Mr. Parnell 2 received the following telegram from Dr. 
 Croke, the Archbishop of Cashel : " Archbishop of Cashel 
 "heartily congratulates Mr. Parnell, Mr. Dillon, and Mr. 
 " O'Kelly on their release. He congratulates the country 
 " through them on the general situation, though the triumph 
 " cannot be considered complete until Michael Davitt is 
 " free, and far from it if Shaw be appointed Chief Secretary." 
 
 It would be superfluous to add that Mr. Gladstone set 
 Michael Davitt free at once, and refrained from appointing 
 Mr. Shaw to the post of Chief Secretary of Ireland, al- 
 though it had already been announced in the papers. 
 
 On May 4, Mr. Forster made his statement, in which he 
 said : " The same grounds on which I vindicated the de- 
 " tention of these gentlemen namely, the ground of the 
 "prevention of crime leads me to object to their release, 
 " which will, I believe, tend to the encouragement of crime. 
 " Why were these gentlemen arrested ? . . . The prisoners 
 "were not arrested merely for illegal agitation. It was 
 " our duty to arrest them for what we considered reasonable 
 " suspicion of the commission of a crime punishable by laiu, 
 "being either an act of intimidation or an incitement 
 1 Times, May 6. 3 St. James's Gazette, May 4.
 
 538 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " thereto. The Act gave us no power to arrest merely for 
 " illegal agitation or sedition, but it gave us power to arrest 
 " for suspicion of participation in those actual crimes by 
 " which men were ruined or injured, or forced, by fear of 
 " being ruined or injured, to do things which they did not 
 " wish to do, or not to do that which they had a right to do. 
 "... The real ground why these gentlemen were arrested, 
 " and why many others were arrested, was because they were 
 " trying to carry out their vieivs, their unwritten law, as they 
 " often called it, and to carry out that by working ruin and 
 " injury to the Queen 's subjects by intimidation of one kind 
 " and another ; and that was carried on to such a degree that 
 " no Government could have allowed it to continue without 
 " becoming a Government merely in name and sJiadow. If 
 "the hon. member for the city of Cork had not been 
 " placed in Kilmainham at the time he was placed there, 
 " Jie would very quickly have become in Ireland what he was 
 " called by many of his friends, uncrowned king of Ireland. 
 " These or other members present organised and success- 
 " fully carried into force a system of intimidation to indi- 
 " viduals generally, of punishing them for obeying the law of 
 " the land, or doing what they had a right to do, and very 
 " often of punishing them for disobedience to their will and 
 " their unwritten law. As soon as I had obtained security 
 " that the law of the land would no longer be set at nought 
 " and trampled under foot by them, I would have assented 
 " to their release ; but until I knew that they either could 
 " not or would not try to put their will in the place of law, 
 "and make men do what they pleased, and tell the Queen's 
 " subjects that the Queen's Courts and the Queen's servants 
 "should not be able to protect them from punishment 
 "punishment by ruin for disobedience in any case they 
 " might wish I could not assent to their release. . . . 
 " Undoubtedly the secret societies have been more active. 
 " But tliere is one thing worse than even secret societies, and 
 " that is the open acknowledgment of the powerlessness of 
 " the law without the assistance of the law-breakers. Better
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 539 
 
 " even secret societies, with which we must contend and 
 " which we should put down, as we have put them down 
 "before better even these hideous instances of the bad 
 " demoralization of Ireland than paying black mail to the 
 " law-breakers. The battle of law against lawlessness is not 
 "won; and I believe that since that battle was begun 
 " there never was a time when it was more dangerous to 
 " relinquish the authority of the law." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone followed Mr. Forster : " I repeat what 
 " has been already stated, that we have frankly availed 
 " ourselves of information tendered to us as to the views of 
 " men whose position in Ireland makes them at any rate sen- 
 " sible factors in the materials that go to determine the con- 
 " dition of that country ; and that information has led to 
 " conclusions on our part to which we have hastened to 
 " give effect. . . . On Wednesday in last week, I had not 
 " received the information that has since come to my know- 
 " ledge. . . . We had information which, with the views 
 " we entertained, carried to our minds the weight of a rational 
 "conviction taking into view the debate on Wednesday and 
 " the declaration of what was in their minds regarded as 
 " quite essential namely, the settlement of the question of 
 " arrears that those gentlemen would find themselves in a 
 " condition to range themselves on the side of law, order, and 
 " individual freedom in Ireland" 
 
 Mr. Parnell spoke next, coldly, carefully, guardedly, 
 as if he were rehearsing by rote : " I have not, either in 
 " writing or verbally, referred to my release. I have not, 
 " either in writing or verbally, referred to this release ; and 
 " with respect to the statement of the Prime Minister I am 
 " sure the right hon. gentleman did not intend it I wish 
 " to say it is the reverse of the fact'' 
 
 Mr. Gladstone, acting on some " mysterious communi- 
 " cation " from some " superior power" suddenly released 
 those who had been " steeped in treason up to the lips,"- 
 those who had endeavoured to subvert the government of 
 the Queen, and were seeking to promote the disintegration
 
 540 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 of the Empire. They were released without trial, without 
 punishment, without having been asked to give promise 
 to behave better in future ; without even a " penitential 
 " confession." They were released at a time when the 
 outrages had increased, and the law was more set at 
 defiance than ever. Not a shadow of ground was alleged 
 for the release, except that "secret and mysterious com- 
 " munication." It was done against the opinion of the 
 Lord Lieutenant of Ireland ; against that of the Chief 
 Secretary ; against that of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland ; 
 against that of the Lord Chancellor of England. One 
 Irish member after another, one of the suspects after 
 another, rose in his place in Parliament to protest against 
 the supposition that he had promised to abstain in future 
 from promoting lawlessness, intimidation, outrage, sedition, 
 rebellion. One after another repudiated contemptuously 
 Mr. Gladstone's insinuation that it was one of them who 
 had communicated that " mysterious information," upon 
 receipt of which Mr. Gladstone had released the prisoners. 
 Even Mr. Gladstone himself, after having shifted from 
 evasion to evasion, admitted that the secret information 
 only " appeared to him to include " the names of those 
 suspects who were "steeped in treason to the lips." From 
 \vhom, then, came the mysterious information, or the stern 
 order to Mr. Gladstone to release the prisoners ? 
 
 No. LXXIV. 
 
 IT had become extremely difficult, at the beginning of 
 May, 1882, for Mr. Gladstone to escape the consequences 
 of a reversal of his apparent Irish policy. I distinguish 
 the apparent from his real policy ; for his aim to establish 
 Irish autonomy had been steadily pursued under all the 
 changes and varieties of the superficial garb of its accidents. 
 Yet every casual, and even ignorant observer must have 
 doubted whether his apparent policy was his real policy ;
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 541 
 
 he must have remarked that, if Mr. Gladstone had really 
 meant what he was always so profuse in professing, the 
 results had been strangely at variance with all his expec- 
 tations ; so that his policy heretofore had been nothing 
 but a series of blunders. "Why, then, should such a 
 " blunderer be trusted (he would ask) to enlarge the sus- 
 " pects who were ' steeped in treason to the lips/ to 
 " permit the Coercion Act to lapse, and to support Mr. 
 " Redmond's Bill for the payment of arrears, and the 
 " establishment of peasant proprietorships ? All this may 
 " prove another series of gigantic blunders too ! " 
 
 But was it really to be supposed that Mr. Gladstone's 
 intended legislation would bring about the peace and 
 tranquillity of Ireland ? " Of course ; and the increasingly 
 " disturbed state of the country rendered it urgent that 
 " the Opposition should aid in passing those sedative 
 " measures." Indeed ! then why had Mr. Gladstone re- 
 peatedly urged that the resolutions on the Procedure of 
 the House should first be taken ? Why did he refuse 
 even to reveal his intentions until the cloture resolution 
 had been passed ? Why did he take the expression of a 
 desire to know his plan for pacifying Ireland, as a resolu- 
 tion of want of confidence ? 
 
 He had already given Ireland three large doses of seda- 
 tive mixture : he had promised them some form of Home 
 Rule ; he had promised to pay their arrears out of the 
 Consolidated Fund ; and he had enlarged the suspects 
 who were " steeped in treason." Surely the doses are 
 operating, and Irish agitation is being lulled to sleep ? 
 No ! the evening papers of May 6 * informed us that : 
 "the rejoicings in Dublin over Mr. Parnell's victory 
 "have reawakened all the old bad spirit which had been 
 "pretty well allayed. The populace generally take it that 
 "Mr. Parnell has beaten the Government, and (as they 
 "would say) England, and can do what he now pleases 
 " and get whatever he asks. Among politicians of higher 
 1 Si. Jamefs Gazette.
 
 542 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " mark, but having the same sympathies, there is much 
 " doubt as to what the whole mystery may be, or may 
 " mean. . . . Yesterday the Home Rule Society reap- 
 " peared in Dublin, and passed a resolution in consequence 
 " of ^cvJiat has just occurred, that nothing but an Irish Par- 
 " liament will or ought to produce peace in Ireland'' The 
 correspondent in Dublin of the Irish World, the American 
 print, had an interview with Mr. Parnell after his release, 
 during which the member for Cork said : " I feel convinced 
 " it will result in the working out of a practical solution of 
 " the land question, and in bringing about an entirely new 
 " departure as regards English government in Ireland, in 
 " tJie direction of allowing the Irish to govern themselves'' 
 The evening papers, of May 6, narrated also an affray 
 between the police and the mob, during the rejoicings, in 
 Ballina, at Mr. Parnell's release, wherein seven persons were 
 shot. The account proceeded to narrate that, also : " A 
 " serious riot occurred at Clonmel last night. The windows 
 " of all buildings not illuminated in honour of Davitt's 
 " release were broken. The police were stoned by the 
 " mob, some constables receiving serious injuries. The 
 " police charged with their bayonets through the principal 
 " streets, which they cleared. Quiet was not restored until 
 " far into the night. The banks, magistrates' houses, post- 
 " office, and some principal merchants' warehouses were 
 " damaged, in consequence of their not being illuminated." 
 Moreover, " At Tramore last night, during the progress of 
 " a procession in honour of the release of Davitt, the win- 
 " dows of many houses were broken by the mob because 
 " they were not illuminated." 
 
 Those accounts were published on the 6th. On the 
 previous evening, the New Lord Lieutenant, Earl Spencer, 
 and the new Irish Secretary, Lord Frederick Cavendish, 
 left London by mail train for Ireland, to inaugurate the 
 policy of conciliation. On the morning of the 6th they 
 were both sworn, in Dublin. The afternoon was sunshiny, 
 calm, and balmy, a fitting herald and emblem of the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 543 
 
 vaunted conciliation. The Phoenix Park was full of persons 
 enjoying their evening. Lord Frederick Cavendish, and 
 Mr. Burke, the Under-Secretary, were walking to the Lord 
 Lieutenant's ! When within one hundred yards of the 
 Viceregal Lodge, and in sight of the Lord Lieutenant 
 himself, they were both gashed and cut to pieces by four 
 assassins. The Liberals in London at once spread the 
 report that the intention had been to assassinate only Mr. 
 Burke (who was a Roman Catholic) ; and that Lord F. 
 Cavendish was killed in defending his newly-made friend. 
 The following, however, was the account given in the Times 
 of Monday morning : 
 
 " The murder must have been deeply planned, and although 
 " the public impression appears to be that it was only 
 "intended to assassinate Mr. Burke, and that Lord F. 
 " Cavendish was murdered because he happened to be with 
 "the Under-Secretary, and to guard against discovery, 
 " there is reason to believe that the design was the very 
 "contrary, and that the object of the miscreants who plotted 
 " the murder was to commit a deed which would strike terror 
 "into the English Government, by murdering not a mere 
 " subordinate officer of the Government here, but one of the 
 " highest rank next to the Viceroy in the Irish Executive, and 
 " the son of a great English peer. They could at any 
 " time have assassinated Mr. Burke, who was well known 
 " in the city, and who walked about at all hours without 
 "fear and unarmed. He never had an escort, and his 
 " habits must have been familiar to all who chose to watch 
 " his movements. ... Mr. Burke and Lord F. Cavendish 
 "both walked together until they reached a spot exactly 
 " opposite the Viceregal Lodge. It was then about half-past 
 " seven o'clock. There the assassins were in waiting for them, 
 "and evidently, from the nature of the wounds, attacked 
 "them from behind with savage ferocity, inflicting upon 
 "each of them death wounds with deep deadly thrusts 
 " of a triangular weapon, probably a long dagger. The 
 "work of blood must have been done in a couple of
 
 544 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " minutes ; and as if to make it the more shocking, it was 
 "committed in full view of the Lord Lieutenant himself, 
 " who was walking in the grounds in front of the Viceregal 
 " Lodge along with Colonel Caulfeild, and saw a group of 
 " men struggling, but attached no importance to it, thinking 
 " it was some horse-play or wrestling on the part of some 
 " of the humbler classes who frequent the park. The same 
 " struggle was witnessed by Captain Greatrex, of the Royal 
 " Dragoons, stationed at Island Bridge Barracks, who 
 "walked through the gate nearest the barracks into the 
 " park and observed a car waiting. He walked on, and 
 " near the scene of the murder saw the struggle, but had no 
 " suspicion that a murder was being perpetrated. He saw 
 " four men get up on the car and drive away." 
 
 The points in that narrative appeared astounding. Yet 
 the statement was corroborated by the evidence of Captain 
 Greatrex. It appears, therefore, that numerous persons 
 were looking on at the murder, from a short distance, and 
 that no one interfered. Captain Greatrex was near enough 
 to distinguish patent leather boots ! He thought it was a 
 highway robbery ; he spoke in a friendly way to the sup- 
 posed robbers, but did not attempt to stop them ; nor did 
 he take the number of the car, although it was broad 
 daylight. When he had seen that a murder had been 
 committed, he did not pursue the car ; nor did he call on 
 his dragoons or on the mounted police to follow its tracks ; 
 nor did he call on the numerous passengers to stop it. 
 The suddenness of the occurrence must have been bewil- 
 dering. 
 
 The Times further gave the following account : " The 
 " Lord Chancellor held an inquiry to-day at Dublin 
 " Castle respecting the death of the Chief Secretary, and 
 "heard the statement of Mr. Spencer, M.P., and Captain 
 " Greatrex, of the ist Royal Dragoons, who saw the tussle 
 "with the assailants, but did not suspect what had hap- 
 " pened. He next saw the men get on to the car, and, as 
 "they drove away, remarked, in a careless way, 'That was
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 545 
 
 " ' rough work/ thinking it was a drunken row. They 
 " answered, ' Rough, indeed,' and drove away by the side 
 " road that leads to Chapelizod and also to the Island- 
 " bridge gate. It is remarked as at least an unfortunate 
 "fatality, if not a most culpable omission, that no pre- 
 " cautions were taken for the protection of the Chief 
 " Secretary, who, as a stranger, might have been expected 
 "to need careful watching. Mr. Forster was perfectly 
 " fearless, and refused to have any escort ; but the police 
 " authorities, without letting him know the fact, always had 
 " a guard kept upon him, as they had reason to believe, from 
 " information in their possession, that his life was not safe." 
 
 Lord Frederick Cavendish was extremely averse to the 
 acceptance of his appointment ; but Mr. Gladstone pressed 
 him strongly to do so, and he gave way, unfortunately. 
 The foreign papers in France, Germany, Austria, Italy, 
 Russia condemned the atrocious deed, in language fitted 
 to its atrocity. The French National compared Irish 
 Fenianism with Russian Nihilism. The Debats said that 
 " the exploits of the Nihilists were surpassed ; in Ireland, 
 " as in Russia, the ultra-revolutionary party did not shrink 
 " from the most abominable crimes to intimidate." The 
 National Zeitung detected the same striking similarity 
 between the Russian Nihilists, the German Socialists, and 
 the Irish Fenians. All those papers were loud in their 
 condemnation of the crime. There were, however, two 
 exceptions. The socialist Marseillaise could palliate 
 guilt : " We pity the victims ; but the immense pity we 
 " feel for the horrible situation of the Irish people forbids 
 " us to show too much sympathy. Ireland, since the first 
 " day of the conquest, has been in a state of legitimate 
 " self-defence. If, at the cost of a series of outrages, she 
 " succeeds in casting off the terrible yoke which the sister 
 " island imposes on her, what friend of humanity would 
 " think of blaming her for it ? " 
 
 The Jesuit organ, the Univers, tried to put the blame on 
 others who did not incite the people to wrong-doing, and 
 
 N N
 
 546 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 then said : " The assassins have not missed their aim. 
 " Their new crime will excite in England such an outburst 
 "of public opinion that Mr. Gladstone's fall has become 
 "probable, and unfortunate Ireland will be again exposed to 
 " all the ivrath of her powerful neighbour." 
 
 The Jesuits deplored the crime as bad policy, thinking 
 it might cause the fall of Gladstone and the failure of his 
 schemes. The leading article in the Times of Monday 
 morning, May 8, was most remarkable. It seemed as 
 if it had struggled out through the almost impenetrable 
 barriers, which had been carefully placed by the guilty, into 
 the freer air of light and truth : 
 
 "The Under Secretary, like the Chief Secretary, the 
 "Lord Lieutenant, the Judges, and the principal agents 
 "of the Executive, was never molested until the repressive 
 " measures, which might be considered in some sense pro- 
 " vocative, were relaxed. It is impossible not to see that 
 "the assassination in the Phoenix Park was deliberately 
 "planned with the object of showing the British Government 
 "the futility of attempting to arrange a compromise with 
 " Irish Nationalism, on the basis of a transaction with respect 
 " to arrears of rent or State aid to tenants purchases of land. 
 "Whether the ambiguous utterances of the Land League 
 "leaders cover any honest meaning or not, the disloyal 
 " section of the Irish people are resolved to make it known, 
 "with all the emphasis of atrocity, that they will not be 
 " bound by any compact, and that they will not desist in 
 " their implacable warfare against the English connection. 
 "... Mr. Forster's warning words will now re-echo 
 " with painful distinctness in the minds of many who duly 
 "cheered the Prime Minister's limping answer to his former 
 " colleague four days ago. It was Mr. Forsters duty to tell 
 " tJu House of Commons and the country tJiat the release of 
 " the suspects, so far from conducing to the pacification of Ire- 
 " land, would tend to the encouragement of crime. The 
 " Government refused to believe him, and the Ministerial 
 " majority dutifully, though half-heartedly, applauded the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 547 
 
 "Government. Mr. Parnell and his friends were careful 
 "not to commit themselves to any general and uncon- 
 " ditional condemnation of outrage. Not more than four 
 " days have elapsed since the policy of conciliation was thus set 
 " in motion, and already we have its hollowness exposed by 
 " the tragedy in the Phoenix Park. It did not deserve any 
 " larger measure of success. It was founded on a combination 
 "of credulity and malice. ' The Cabinet was induced \a run 
 "open-mouthed, to the representatives of Irish disaffection, 
 "with offers of surrender. Mr. Forster, who knew by a 
 "hard experience what the Irish question really meant, 
 "and who manfully stood by his convictions, was deserted 
 " by his colleagues, and left no choice but to resign. The 
 "history of this transaction, though its details may be 
 " decorously veiled, is perfectly understood by the public, 
 " and, if we know the temper of the English people, it will 
 "be judged as it deserves. Mr. Forster WAS THE VICTIM 
 "OF AN INTRIGUE WHICH WAS WORKED FROM WITHIN 
 " THE CABINET, and which was industriously developed out- 
 " side through ' organs ' and organizations. The personality 
 " and the policy of the Chief Secretary were alike assailed 
 "unscrupulously and unsparingly, and A SHAM CRISIS WAS 
 "GOT UP TO PRECIPITATE HIS ENFORCED RESIGNATION, 
 "precisely at the time when, as he stated in Parliament, his 
 "measures might have been made successful by persistence 
 " and courage. . . . The cowardly machinations against 
 " Mr. Forster, paralysed the forces of order. Not the Chief 
 "Secretary alone, but 'Dublin Castle* that is, eminently 
 "and almost exclusively Mr. Burke 'became the object of 
 " systematic vilification. . . . The aim of Irish agitation 
 "is to establish in Ireland an independent government, 
 "implacably hostile to England and protected by the 
 " United States, and in this cause the Land League has 
 "contrived to enlist the agrarian greed of the peasantry. 
 " . . . Only wilful blindness can now fail to see that 
 " behind tJie agrarian agitation, behind the ' social revolution ' 
 " which is Mr. Gladstone's latest but still imperfect diag-
 
 548 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " nosis of Irish disorder, there is a political revolution inspired 
 " by implacable hatred to English rule, and shrinking from 
 " nothing that may seem to further its ends or even gratify 
 "its passions. The assassination of the Chief Secretary 
 " and Under Secretary is a contemptuous defiance flung 
 "back in the face of a Government which has just put a 
 " severe strain upon the allegiance of its supporters, by a 
 " nearly unqualified surrender to Irish ideas. The removal 
 " of Mr. Forster, the reversal of the policy with which he 
 " has been associated, the opening of the prison doors to 
 " the suspects, the promise of legislation upon arrears, the 
 " postponement of legislation for the strengthening of the 
 " law all have been in vain. The answer to all this is the 
 "cruel murder of a man personally unknown to the Irish 
 " people, at the precise moment when he most distinctly 
 " embodies an immense concession to Irish demands." 
 
 The aim of the assassinations was revealed by the cut 
 and dried resolutions passed at meetings on Sunday, the 
 day after the murder, in London and Manchester ; a little 
 more than twelve hours after the murders in Ireland, these 
 resolutions were ready and passed ! The meetings were 
 evidently not hastily called, but must have been organized, 
 beforehand, by the pliant and obedient tools of the political 
 intriguers. At Clerkenwell Green the following resolution 
 was passed : . 
 
 " That this meeting, while condemning the brutal murder 
 " of Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke, still wishes 
 " to express its decided opinion that the peace of Ireland 
 " can only be conserved by placing the responsible represen- 
 " tatives of the Irish people in charge of the destinies of Ire- 
 " land ; and therefore calls for the appointment of Mr. 
 " Charles Stewart Parnell, M.P., to the Chief Secretaryship 
 "of Ireland, and that this resolution be forwarded to the 
 "Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone and the Right Hon. Sir 
 " William HarcourL" 
 
 At Manchester, Mr. Redmond, M.P., attended a demon- 
 stration of Irishmen held in the Free Trade Hall " to
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 549 
 
 " celebrate the collapse of coercion and the triumph of the 
 " Land League, to rejoice at the liberation of Messrs. 
 " Parnell, Davitt, Dillon, and O'Kellyv and to express 
 "delight at the breakdown of repression, and to rejoice 
 "at the disgrace and humiliation of its most offensive 
 " champion, Buckshot Forster." 
 
 The following was the resolution which was unanimously 
 carried : 
 
 " That this meeting has learnt with consternation the 
 " rumour of the assassination of Lord Frederick Cavendish 
 " yesterday in Dublin, and heartily trusts that confirmation 
 " may not be given to what would be, if committed, a crime 
 " repugnant to the feelings of the entire Irish people. But 
 "this meeting desires to impress upon the Government 
 " and the people of England that the only way in which 
 " law and order can be assured is by the establishment of a 
 " Government constitutionally responsible to the people of 
 " Ireland." 
 
 In connection with those prepared meetings, and cut and 
 dried resolutions, we must advert to a Bill for the Abolition 
 of the Vice-royalty of Ireland, which had been brought in 
 by Mr. Richard Power. This Bill provided new arrange- 
 ments for the Irish Privy Council and for the exercise of 
 powers (till then vested in the Lord Lieutenant), by Her 
 Majesty on the advice of the Irish Privy Council. The 
 I4th Clause provided that the Secretary of State for Ire- 
 land should be an Irishman, and must represent an Irish 
 Constituency. " It is for this Bill (said the Times of 
 " May 8) that Mr. Speaker Brand granted precedence over 
 " Mr. Heneage's motion." 
 
 It behoves us now to give some quotations from the 
 speech which the Right Hon. W. H. Smith delivered, at 
 Coventry, on Saturday, May 6, at the very time the 
 assassinations were taking place. 
 
 " On the 26th of April there was a Bill before the House 
 "of Commons which was intended to amend the Land 
 " Act. That Bill, according to Mr. Gladstone and the hon.
 
 550 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " members belonging to what was called the Irish National 
 " party, afforded the only gleam of hope he had seen 
 " during a long period. But what were the concluding 
 "words of Mr. Redmond's speech? He said, 'Ireland 
 " 'would be a peaceful, a prosperous nation, finding her best 
 " ' security for law and order in her prosperity, in the making 
 " 'of tlu laws for Ireland by Irishmen on Irish soil' Now 
 " you see here the train of mind through which the Govern- 
 " ment has been passing. You see that they recognised a 
 " social revolution ; they received a measure at the hands of 
 "the Irish National party, the declared aim and object of 
 " that measure, and the ultimate ptirpose of that measure 
 " being the dissolution of tlie union betiveen England and 
 "Ireland, and tJte making of Irish laws upon Irish soil, 
 " Then Mr. Gladstone considered the course which he should 
 " take ; conciliation was once more had recourse to ; and 
 " for whom was this conciliation intended ? This conciliation, 
 " this concession was extended to tJu very persons tvho had been 
 " denounced only on the qth of April. They were the men 
 "who, Mr. Gladstone himself stated or suggested, were 
 " among the persons who obviously had assisted in this social 
 " revolution. Why were they conciliated, and why were they 
 " released ? Was it because the policy of Her Majesty's 
 " Government was felt to have failed, or was it for anotJier 
 "purpose ? . . . Was it conceivable that men, with a single 
 " eye to the interest of the country placed in their hands, should 
 "have willingly, and he was going to say hastily, thrown 
 "over their colleagues, simply because they had not time to 
 " wait to pass an Act which would have secured the repres- 
 " sion of crime and strengthened the administration of the 
 "law? . . . But if the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland and the 
 " Chief Secretary were supposed to be prejudiced, to be led 
 " by the nose by those who had an interest in endeavouring 
 "to persuade them that coercion was necessary, what was 
 " to be said of the opinion of one of the staunchest of the 
 "Whig peers, Lord Fitzwilliam, who had said that the 
 " action of the Government in Ireland had produced the most
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 551 
 
 " terrible demoralization ever recorded in tJie history of a 
 " civilised people ; and the complete surrender now made to 
 " intimidation and crime, for the sake of a temporary and 
 " possible tranquillity, must ever remain a source of weak- 
 " ness to all Governments hereafter, and a danger to every 
 " loyal man in the community ? " 
 
 No. LXXV. 
 
 THE Times correspondent, who telegraphed from Paris on 
 Monday, May 8, had been busily employed in eliciting the 
 opinions of the statesmen in that capital. Their judgment 
 he regarded as calm and unprejudiced ; for their minds 
 were unruffled by passion, and their interests were not in- 
 volved The correspondent had put aside the opinions of 
 those Roman Catholics who were inflamed against England 
 by "religious fanaticism." It was through a mistaken 
 fervour that they had taken the side of the Irish rebels, 
 and thought light of the frequent violations of God's laws. 
 Even the calmest of the clerical party those who held 
 that the religious question had nothing to say to the Irish 
 sedition even they refused to condemn the assassinations, 
 because (said they) Roman Catholicism had, in former 
 centuries, been oppressed in Ireland ! As if that state- 
 ment, supposing it true, could have warranted the crime 
 of murder ! Such a notion was the result of the teaching 
 of Mariana, Suarez, and the other Jesuits ! 
 
 Putting them aside, the result of the inquiry was this : 
 The Conservatives looked upon the assassinations as parts 
 of a general plan, which was being realized, now here, now 
 there, throughout Europe. It was one outcrop of a world- 
 wide conspiracy. The assassinations in Dublin were the 
 necessary result of a supposed compromise between Mr. 
 Parnell and the Government. It was a protest against all 
 half-measures. It was, therefore, they said, a positive duty 
 of the Government to abandon a policy of concession and 
 compromise, which the Revolutionists regarded as mere
 
 552 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 signs of weakness and fear, and which "irremediably weakens 
 "respect for authority, not only in England, but also through- 
 put Europe." The Liberals, on the other hand, saw in it 
 the determination of the Irish to separate themselves from 
 England. Home Rule was (they said) a mere form, a 
 pretext, a byword, for the Irish. The desire was to 
 separate Ireland by means of revolution, so that it might 
 become " the centre, the basis, and the support " of the 
 revolution in Europe. Such was their view of the Tyr- 
 connel, or rather Jesuit, scheme. 
 
 Those who had separated themselves from those feelings 
 of the moment, which had naturally been aroused by the 
 account of the brutal murder of their friend and associate 
 of but two days before, remembered that such murders had 
 been occurring for the last two years ; murders as horrible, 
 although they had not been brought home by the sudden 
 severance of the ties of intimacy. Lord Mountmorres had 
 been murdered ; Mr. Herbert had been murdered ; Mrs. 
 Smythe had been murdered. During that time Mr. Parnell 
 had calmly said no more than that murder is " an entirely 
 "unnecessary measure of procedure, and absolutely preju- 
 dicial, where there was a suitable organization of the 
 "tenants." Mr. Sexton had condemned murder merely 
 because " it hurts our cause ; it raises the cry for coercion, 
 " which may perhaps interfere with our movement." The 
 Irish World directly inculcated the doctrine that "every 
 "pistol shot will stimulate action." Mr. Parnell's paper, 
 United Ireland, taught its ignorant readers much the same 
 doctrine. 
 
 Who was shocked at all this ? Did it come home to the 
 minds of the Government, or Mr. Gladstone's followers, as 
 it should have done ? Yet the outrages of those two years 
 had all been perpetrated with the consent and connivance 
 of that Irish organization the Land League. Under that 
 specious land agitation, every form of disaffection and law- 
 lessness had been grouped, in order to effect Mr. Gladstone's 
 object of the separation of Ireland from England. The
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 553 
 
 last outrage differed from the others merely in being the 
 last, and in its having immediately followed Mr. Glad- 
 stone's " new departure " ; his manumission of the sus- 
 pects ; his policy of concession and conciliation ; his treaty 
 of alliance, offensive and defensive, with Parnell, Davitt, 
 and Co. ; his promise to grant further concessions with 
 regard to the land to grant, indeed, all that the Land 
 League had demanded in that respect. It was felt that, 
 when those concessions had been gained and fully secured, 
 then would come the next step, to which the land question 
 had been but the means namely, the separation of Ireland 
 from England. The gullible British public, however, re- 
 fused to see that Mr. Gladstone had been all along 
 marching with the Land League. They listened to the 
 volumes of words he ever and anon poured forth ; were 
 mystified ; and did not observe the direction in which he 
 was advancing. Thus the Times leader of May 9 : " There 
 "will inevitably be the suspicion that wJien people are 
 "playing the same game, with the same wild and reckless 
 "licence, and the same disregard of rules, some with the 
 "tongue, some with the hands \ there is sometJiing of an under- 
 " standing between them. But,, whether in Parliament or 
 " out of it, whether in public or in private, it is quite certain 
 "that all temporizing, all negotiating, all parleying with 
 "the Secret Power governing Ireland will be a ridiculous 
 " failure, and most likely a sanguinary failure also." 
 
 The same number of the leading journal contained a 
 letter from Mr. O'Donnell, the Home Rule member, dated 
 " House of Commons, May 8." He was a gentleman that 
 knew much ; but was, I should say, not certainly " among 
 " the prophets," and could not foretell. He wrote as fol- 
 lows : " In a letter which your courtesy allowed to appear 
 " in the Times, I declared that tJte danger of the moment 
 " was the occurrence of some deplorable crime calculated to 
 " shock and startle English feeling back into a mood of mer- 
 " ciless repression. In justice to myself as well as my 
 " friends, allow me to remind your readers of that warning,
 
 554 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " since so horribly justified, and to quote a couple of the 
 " sentences in which I urged, upon the responsible authori- 
 " ties in Ireland, the course which I conceived to be espe- 
 " cially required by the danger of the moment ' I do not 
 " { fear,' I said in my letter dated May 3, ' to ask that now, 
 " ' above all, magistrates and police shall do their duty in the 
 " 'protection of unpopular lives, in the defence and protection 
 " ' of threatened persons and property, with even greater 
 " ' vigilance than ever. Let not the inevitable changes at 
 " ' headquarters cause a failure or falling off of this most 
 " 'necessary duty, which is, if possible, doubly necessary now' 
 
 " Sir, why did not some such caution occur to the mind 
 " of some person in governing authority in Dublin ? The 
 " most moderate vigilance, the slightest supervision of precious 
 " and inestimable life, would have absolutely prevented the 
 " occurrence of that fearful and odious tragedy, and never 
 " should we have heard of the grimly burlesque work of 
 " barbarous murder being coolly accomplished under the half- 
 " amused eyes of a viceregal household, unconcerned spec- 
 tators of what was believed to be a vulgar brawl, the 
 " assassins finally driving off with the cheery jest of a 
 " captain of Dragoons in their ears ' Rough work, boys ! ' 
 " ' Rough, indeed,' responded the reeking assassins." 
 
 As might have been expected, an enormous reward 
 (10,000) was offered for such information as would lead 
 to the conviction of the murderers. Yet, strange to say, 
 the same paragraph in the St. James's Gazette (May 10), 
 which made that offer known, also informed its readers as 
 follows : " But, on the other hand, two men who were 
 " observed at Crewe station, as ' answering minutely,' and 
 " in fact, ' corresponding in every particular ' to the adver- 
 tised description of the murderers, were ' lost sight of by 
 " the Crewe police, who ' refused,' it is said, ' to take the 
 " ' responsibility of telegraphing.' " 
 
 The popular imagination had been struck, and popular 
 feeling was strongly excited against the Government. "A 
 "large and excited crowd of persons, who were for the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 555 
 
 " most part well dressed," said the Times, " gathered in 
 " Palace Yard, when the Houses were assembling. The 
 " police had been strengthened early in the day ; and as 
 "the people in Palace Yard commenced to groan and 
 " hiss several of the Ministers as they arrived, the yard was 
 " cleared. The mob increased in the street to large pro- 
 " portions ; and among those who met with unfriendly 
 "notice were the Prime Minister, Mr. Bright, and Mr. 
 "Chamberlain." The last- mentioned Minister did, in 
 effect, get into the clutches of persons who seemed as if 
 they would have strangled him and torn him in pieces, but 
 for the prompt and resolute interference of the police. For 
 the police can interfere when not hampered by cross orders. 
 
 The feeling of those in wealthy circumstances, again, 
 was evinced by a requisition to the Lord Mayor to call a 
 meeting in the Guildhall, for petitioning the Queen to 
 dissolve Parliament, on the ground that many Liberals 
 and Conservatives throughout the country desired to elect 
 another Parliament to deal more successfully with the 
 " reign of murder " which had prevailed in Ireland during 
 the last two years, and which the present Government 
 had failed to cope with. 1 
 
 Those manifestations of popular feeling In quiet, orderly 
 old England, against the Government, induced the Home 
 Secretary, Sir William Harcourt, to take precautions for 
 the preservation in London of his own precious skin pre- 
 cautions which had been so scandalously neglected in the 
 case of Lord Frederick Cavendish, on his entry into 
 the capital of lawless, seditious, murder-loving Ireland. 
 " Sir. William Harcourt (according to the Times) in the 
 " afternoon sent round an official note to Col. Henderson, 
 " the head of the police, the result of which was that extra 
 " special constables were placed near the official and private 
 " residences of all the Cabinet Ministers." One policeman 
 had been for many months ever since the incident of the 
 rusty pistol on duty at the door of Sir W. Harcourt's 
 1 St. James's Gaze tie, May 8.
 
 556 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 residence in Grafton Street But one was not enough ; he 
 must have extra policemen ! 
 
 The Manchester Courier, on May 9, stated that the 
 Fenian ticket-of-leave man, " Michael Davitt, had an in- 
 " terview with Mr. Gladstone on Sunday evening, May 7, 
 " and immediately left for Paris to confer with Mr. Patrick 
 " Egan," the Secretary and Treasurer of the Land League. 
 This circumstance hinted pretty plainly at the relations 
 which existed between Mr. Gladstone and the Land 
 League ! The mission was destined to have results ; and 
 the results perhaps became apparent in the action of Mr. 
 Parnell's intimate friend, M. Rochefort. That gentleman, 
 in his newspaper, justified the Dublin atrocities, and wrote, 
 on the faith of information received from Irish friends, as 
 follows l : " The leaders of the Land League think it 
 " almost certain they will be able to prove that their 
 " subordinates had nothing to do with the murder of the two 
 " Secretaries of State, and that the assassins must be sought 
 " for in the landlord party, who are afraid above everything 
 " of being dispossessed. The instigators of the Irish move- 
 " ment are so firmly convinced of this, that Parnell, in his 
 " proclamation, reserves himself for the day when the guilty 
 " persons will be in the hand of justice ; but it is to 
 " be feared that they will never be secured. . . . Our 
 " Irish friends rely on a number of indications which they 
 '* consider sufficient to rebut the idea of any participation 
 " by the Land Leaguers or Fenians in this double crime. 
 " In the first place it is evident that Lord F. Cavendish 
 " was followed, not merely from the time of his arrival in 
 " Dublin, but from the moment of his departiire from Lon- 
 " don. Now, the men of coups de main, who fire on farmers 
 " in order to cure them of the desire to pay their rents, 
 " have always acted spontaneously, and under the influence 
 " of an altogether unpremeditated fury. They are in- 
 " capable of marking their victims from such a distance, 
 " and are, moreover, too short of means to concoct a plot 
 1 Times, May 10.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 557 
 
 " with threads extending from England to Ireland. In the 
 " second place, the choice of the park where the Secretary 
 " of State was to alight, and the waiting in the very avenue 
 " where he was walking, denote an exact knowledge by the 
 " conspirators of the topography of the park, and of the 
 " certainty that Lord F. Cavendish would pass through it 
 " in order to reach his official residence. Moreover, the 
 " Irish revolutionists, in the accomplishment of their ven- 
 geance, almost always use the pistol or gun, not the 
 " dagger. Lastly, the care taken to despatch their victims, 
 " and to postpone mounting the car until they had drawn 
 " the last sigh, indicate anxieties not in keeping with the 
 " clumsiness of the executions perpetrated by the Irish 
 " peasants. Everything, therefore, leads to the presumption 
 " that millionaires, and not outcasts, had to do with the 
 " Phoenix Park catastropJie" 
 
 The Times then appended a challenge to the Irish 
 members to disclaim the transmission of such intelligence 
 to M. Rochefort a challenge which of course was not 
 taken up. These were the words of the Times, in excusing 
 itself for reproducing the article : " Because M. Rochefort's 
 " Irish friends may think it necessary to disclaim having 
 "prompted him. The details into which he enters are a 
 "proof that it was inspired by SOMEBODY; and in the 
 "absence of disclaimer, suspicion may evidently fall on 
 "innocent persons. The Citoyen, moreover (which all 
 "through its columns continues to substitute 'execution' 
 " or ' suppression ' for ' murder ' or ' assassination'), appends 
 " this note to the Parnell manifesto : ' This manifesto ex- 
 "' plains itself. There are two organizations in Ireland, 
 "'one public, the other secret. The former pretends to 
 " ' keep within the limits of legality, and for form's sake is 
 " ' obliged to protest against the terrorist measures.' " 
 
 The same number of the Times contained a letter from 
 Miss Anna Parnell, justifying the murders, and vilifying the 
 " conciliation." She concluded : " If there are any who are 
 "surprised that the assassin's arm is not idle, they must
 
 558 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " forget that there is such a thing as human nature among 
 "Irishmen." That letter was dated the day after the 
 assassinations, " Dublin, Sunday, May 7." Beneath this 
 letter, the Times appended Mr. Gladstone's opinion of the 
 assassinations, which had been telegraphed to the Marquis 
 of Ripon, on Monday, May 8, by Mr. Gladstone himself in 
 reply to a telegram from the Viceroy of India : " Many 
 " thanks : all are as well as could be hoped. The object of 
 " the black act plainly is to rouse indignant passions and 
 "embitter relations between Great Britain and Ireland." 
 The question remained : Who desired to arouse passions, so 
 as to cause a separation between England and Ireland ? 
 
 Mr. George Otto Trevelyan, M.P., was appointed to 
 succeed Mr. Forster as Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant, 
 and started for his post on May 10. Yet hardly to succeed 
 Mr. Forster; for Mr. Forster had been in the Cabinet, 
 while Lord Cowper, the Lord Lieutenant, was not in the 
 Cabinet. The successor of the latter (Lord Spencer) was 
 put in the Cabinet, while Mr. Trevelyan had no seat in the 
 Cabinet. The Times of the roth gave the true explanation 
 of this change : " It is true that Mr. Trevelyan's position 
 " outside the Cabinet, like that of his lamented predecessor 
 " (Lord Frederick Cavendish), must be taken as a proof that 
 " the Prime Minister intends himself to assume a large respon- 
 " sibilityfor the management of Irish affairs. Lord Spencer, 
 "who represents the Irish Government in the Cabinet, 
 " must be, with rare exceptions, at his post in Dublin ; and 
 " in Cabinet Councils, it may be presumed, Irish business 
 " will be specially under the control of Mr. Gladstone" The 
 same leading journal also reproduced the singularly clear- 
 sighted remarks of the official journal of Prince Gortcha- 
 koff : " To-day's Golos thinks that the tragical deaths of 
 " Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke prove that Mr. 
 " Gladstone was profoundly mistaken in supposing that Par- 
 " nell and his friends were the real leaders of the Irish 
 " movement, and that peace could be obtained by mere agrarian 
 " reforms. The movement is political, and not entirely agra-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 559 
 
 " rian; and THERE is A SECRET PARTY BEHIND THE LAND 
 "LEAGUE who aim at nothing short of overthrowing 
 " English authority." 
 
 Was Mr. Gladstone really mistaken ? or was he working 
 intelligently towards a different aim from that which 
 men supposed, different from that which had been 
 openly avowed ? True it was, that there was a Secret 
 Power behind the Land League, which aimed at achieving 
 the Tyrconnel policy, in the separation of Ireland from 
 England. But what if Mr. Gladstone were submissive to 
 the head of that secret power? What if his acts were 
 such that they could not be accounted for, except either by 
 attributing gross ignorance, or else met by a charge of 
 subservience ? 
 
 Let us watch and see what his policy was, in this awful 
 conjuncture. Let us see whether his eyes had been opened 
 and the veil of ignorance partially removed ; let us mark 
 whether his policy changed ; or whether he went on his 
 way unchanged in all, not excepting verbose sentences and 
 sounding professions ! 
 
 No. LXXVI. 
 
 DIRECTLY after those horrible murders, while innocent 
 blood was crying to Heaven for vengeance, the Government 
 of Mr. Gladstone proclaimed that they were not going to 
 propose anything different from what the Cabinet had 
 already agreed to, before the outrages had been com- 
 mitted ! Thus Lord Granville announced the intentions 
 of the Government on May 8 : "Your lordships are well 
 " aware that some days ago I announced the intention of 
 " Her Majesty's Government to propose to Parliament 
 "three measures one with regard to strengthening the 
 "administration of justice and the security of private rights 
 "in Ireland, one affecting arrears, and another affecting 
 " what are called the Bright clauses. Her Majesty's Govern-
 
 560 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 11 ment adhere to that intention. After very careful considera- 
 " tion by a Committee of the Cabinet, and by the Cabinet 
 " itself, a Bill for the first of these objects was drafted 
 " before the end of last week. It still requires some little con- 
 " sideration as to some of its details, but it is hoped that 
 " the Government will be able to ask the House of Com- 
 "mons next Thursday to give a first reading to that Bill." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone was more guarded, and said : " We intend 
 "to ask the House on Thursday next to permit us to 
 " introduce a measure relating to the repression of crime 
 " in Ireland ; and we have the fullest confidence that, if 
 "that measure really corresponds in its spirit to what it 
 " ought to be, we shall be duly supported and assisted in 
 " its various stages by the sentiments of all quarters of the 
 " House. That on Thursday next. Next to that, and I 
 " hope upon an early day, we shall introduce a measure 
 " with respect to the question of arrears in Ireland? 
 
 To that adherence to the fatal " new departure," which 
 had been adopted before the assassinations, the Con- 
 servative leaders, in both Houses, assented. The Houses 
 were then adjourned. The answer was given on Wednes- 
 day, 1 " Placards were posted in Dublin,, announcing the 
 " formation of a ' National Association of Ireland,' which 
 " will have for its object the restoration of the ancient legis- 
 " lative independence of Ireland. A meeting was called for 
 "the 1 5th inst. to enrol members. The placard contained 
 "hostile references to the Castle officials and to the present 
 " form of Government." 
 
 In the Times of May n, a letter appeared, from an 
 authority of weight and consequence. His words deserve 
 to be remembered. " It is well to have such sympathy ex- 
 " hibited by the people, who have hitherto been unmoved 
 " by atrocities as great, though not so conspicuous and so 
 " startling, as that which has been committed almost under 
 " their own eyes. The event might have been turned to 
 " good account in the way of awaking their slumbering con- 
 1 St. James's Gazette, May 10.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 has been so vehemen 
 "It is the mu r of 
 "trusting to the humanity 
 "and, ' 
 
 
 . 
 
 murder "hid, 
 speaker, 
 came to Ireland 
 f its People; 
 
 t 
 "Son which have ben mantfe "^ M<J 
 
 "acute and earnest if notTof ""' rendered 
 "the conviction that it was U, ,' T ?""" pr duced ' 
 " iniquitous, that it was not ^ "*** as we " 
 
 * 
 
 
 " Coercion A,< Were com tted before the 
 
 o o
 
 562 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Mr. Parnell of course spoke, in the House of Commons, 
 against the murders : and Mr. Parnell 1 had to apply to the 
 Home Secretary for the privilege of police protection, as 
 he had found from threatening letters which he had re- 
 ceived, and from current rumours which he had heard, that 
 his life was in danger from assassins. There were also 
 meetings of Boards of Guardians and Municipalities in 
 Ireland, to protest against the murder of Lord F. Caven- 
 dish ; and persons felt surprised thereat, because, for two 
 long years, murders as atrocious had been perpetrated 
 without a word of protest from either prelates or people. 
 It was soon discovered, however, that those meetings were 
 not spontaneous. They had been ordered by telegraphic 
 messages from London. 2 A gentleman who had seen one 
 of those orders, which had been telegraphed from an Irish 
 member of Parliament, wrote to the St. James's Gazette an 
 account of it. It was in these words : " Gladstone informs 
 " me that he has appointed Trevelyan, a friend of mine 
 "and of Ireland. Gladstone will stand or fall by concilia- 
 " tion. Let priests and people strengthen his hands and hold 
 " meetings to denounce the crime." 
 
 On the previous day, a letter from Mr. Davitt the Davitt 
 who had been sent by Mr. Gladstone to Rochefort 
 appeared in the Standard. He complained that last year 
 he was setting out on a pilgrimage through the country to 
 denounce outrage, and was engaged on that very work, when 
 he was arrested by Mr. Gladstone's Government. He asserted, 
 moreover, that he was " silenced by those who wished the 
 "outrages to continue" He endeavoured to explain this 
 startling fact by the following theory. He said : " What 
 " are the facts of Irish history ? Are they not that, over 
 " and over again, seditious conspiracies have been allowed 
 " to grow, nay, even have been stimulated, in order that a 
 " certain stage of criminality should be reached by those 
 "whose actions and plans were known to the police, 
 " so that the blow should be struck at their movements 
 1 St. James's Gazette, May 12. 2 Ibid., May 12,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 563 
 
 "with the greater tdat, and the chastisement given 
 'be .all the more effective from the numbers involved in 
 "the revolutionary design? I was either sent back to 
 " penal servitude in pursuance of such a policy, or I was 
 " not. ... I challenge Mr. Forster, or whoever is re- 
 " sponsible for my arrest, to come forward now and declare 
 " upon what grounds I was deprived of liberty during the 
 " past fifteen months, or to allow Dublin Castle to lie Under 
 " the imputation of having removed me from its path, be- 
 " cause of my stand against tJie policy of conniving at murder 
 " and outrage" 
 
 Let us now consider the phenomenon of the Coercion 
 Bill, brought in by Sir William Harcourt, which was denied 
 the sanction of Mr. Gladstone's presence. A week before, 
 the whole Cabinet, with the exception of Mr. Forster, who 
 was absent in Ireland, was led to believe that the only 
 way to arrest the fearful, and ever-increasing growth of 
 crime, and sedition, and lawlessness in Ireland, was to let 
 loose the traitors, and to take the conspirators into partner- 
 ship ; while they bribed the populace to remain quiet, by 
 giving them ever-new concessions in land legislation. In 
 other words, the agitation was to be quieted by the Govern- 
 ment accomplishing the work of the agitators ; the con- 
 spirators were to be consigned to rest, by the Government 
 undertaking to become conspirators, and to grant all that 
 had been demanded. This was the "new departure" 
 which Mr. Gladstone took, and which Mr. Forster refused 
 to sanction. The Dublin murders, however, appealed 
 forcibly to the popular imagination, and there arose a 
 great danger of Mr. Gladstone being turned out of office, 
 and then his work, so long carried on, would possibly lapse 
 for a considerable time. Something had to be done. A 
 strong Bill, he said, must forthwith be brought in. The 
 majority of the Cabinet, indeed, insisted on it; and Mr. 
 Gladstone knew that the effects of the Bill would alto- 
 gether depend upon its administration. It might be 
 passed, and then be allowed to remain a dead letter for 
 ever.
 
 564 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 The Ultramontane paper, the Univers, described it l as 
 " a policy of hatred " ; and said that although the assassins 
 were certainly guilty, yet "the Liberal (Sir W. Harcourt) who 
 "had made himself the tool of a merciless policy," had also 
 his share of injustice. The Journal de Rome of May II 
 said that: "Mr. Gladstone would not abandon the supreme 
 "power, but would endeavour to pursue his programme 
 " of conciliation, shaping it according to the necessities 
 " of the new situation, such as the late events have made 
 "it." It also expressed a hope that "Mr. Parnell would 
 " rally all the moderate elements of Ireland to the support 
 " of Mr. Gladstone's Government, and of order and security 
 "in Ireland." The Italia foresaw that if the Irish revolters 
 should prove successful, it would be a bad example of a 
 people getting rid of those whom it chose to consider as 
 oppressors. The struggle would be understood by the 
 masses, and the consequences would be great. In every 
 country where the land was not the property of the 
 peasants, grave difficulties would arise. The Italians 
 would not lose sight of the lessons given by the Irish ; the 
 Italians would soon organize a legal resistance to its 
 Government. The Lega della Democrazia saw in the situa- 
 tion of Ireland the proclamation of a Federal Constitution 
 for Great Britain. All that had hitherto prevented Mr. 
 Gladstone from introducing his Federal system (it said) was 
 the proverbial hatred of the English for the Irish. " Yet (it 
 "continued) Mr. Gladstone has made his first step to justify 
 " that policy of his. His next step will be to place Irish- 
 " men in the offices of Ireland, and make them responsible 
 " for the condition of the country. The programme of 
 " ' Home Rule' that is, the Federal principle, will then 
 "have been realized, and it will be the most important 
 " victory of the triumphant career of Mr. Gladstone." 
 
 A meeting of the citizens of Manchester was held on the 
 1 2th to- express abhorrence of the Dublin assassinations. 
 Dr. Vaughan, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Salford, wrote 
 
 1 May 12.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 565 
 
 to the Mayor, who presided : " God grant that our just 
 "indignation may not degenerate into the weakness of 
 "vengeance or panic, and that the black deed of last 
 "Saturday may not be allowed to retard by a day that 
 " policy of conciliation towards the sister country which 
 " had already been announced. The English people 
 " are rich and strong. They can, therefore, afford, while 
 " steadily following up crime and extending the protection 
 " of law to the weak, to be generous and just, and to reverse, 
 " if possible, by a supreme act, once for all, the remnant of 
 " misrule in Ireland which is the result of the policy we have 
 ''pursued during the last two centuries" What was "the 
 "supreme act" by which he desired the English people 
 " to reverse, once for all, the remnant of misrule in Ireland, 
 " which was the result of the policy of 1688 " ? Doubtless, 
 he meant that autonomy should be granted to Ireland, so 
 that it might become a separate Roman Catholic country. 
 But would it be a Roman Catholic country ? After your 
 incentives to robbery, pillage, boycotting, cruelties, and 
 murder, could it remain Roman Catholic ? If so, then 
 Roman Catholicism can thrive along with violations of the 
 law of God. If the Roman Catholic Church is the true 
 Church, you have all along been labouring to expel the 
 Roman Catholic Church from Ireland, and to make Ire- 
 land an autonomous atheistical country, the focus of 
 revolution for Europe ! 
 
 The Times of May 13 contained the following sensible 
 remarks from Dublin : " It is time the public should be 
 " informed clearly and with exact particulars, who was and 
 " is responsible for allowing Lord F. Cavendish to walk un- 
 " attended from Dublin Castle through the streets and over 
 " the bridge to the entrance of the park, and proceed alone 
 " absolutely alone in the evening, into a comparatively 
 " lonely part of the Phoenix Park. Outside Dublin Castle, 
 "the secret society had its agents. If the officials were 
 " asleep, the assassins were awake, alert, strenuous, and 
 " unflinching. They meant to 'catch' the Chief Secretary ;
 
 566 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " and, shocking as the truth is, no one now doubts it. If 
 " Air. Burke fell, that was an accident of the occasion and 
 " the emergency. The assassins had doomed the highest 
 " officials in Ireland, and one of them, at least, they secured 
 '* through the oversight of those whose duty it was to leave 
 " nothing whatever to chance. The peril in which even a 
 " higher dignitary than the late Chief Secretary was placed ; 
 " his nearness to the spot in which assassins, like tigers, lurked 
 " with safety ; his entire absence of suspicion of foul play 
 " all tell the one tale of incompetence in the authorities, 
 " and of deadly organization elsewhere. And yet no autho- 
 " rities ever had more potent instruments, apart altogether 
 " from the military. The mounted constables of the Irish 
 " constabulary, who are now met at every point in the park, 
 " will compare with the smartest cavalry in the world. Two 
 " of these trim, stalwart horsemen on Saturday, would have 
 " saved Lord F. Cavendish 's life ; six of them, if called out 
 " in time, could easily have run down and captured his 
 " assassins. There was neither protection before, nor energy 
 " after the crime. The assassins may or may not be arrested. 
 "If they are, something will have been done towards aveng- 
 " ing a specially dangerous and ferocious murder. In any 
 " case, tJie public have a right to demand an answer to the 
 " question just put. Seeing tJtat Mr. Forster was protected 
 " without his knorvledge and consent, why was Lord Frede- 
 " rick Cavendish, his immediate successor, left entirely un- 
 " protected?" 
 
 Two days afterwards (May 15), the Times gave the fol- 
 lowing account of the transaction : " Every one expresses 
 " surprise and disgust at the want of promptitude on the 
 " part of the authorities after the crime was committed. 
 " Seldom if ever has there been an instance in which infor- 
 " mation has been so quickly conveyed to the police, and 
 " all the resources of the Executive were within easy reach. 
 " Within a quarter of an hour after the murder, the police. 
 " heard of it. There is a mounted section of the force. There 
 "were military and police to spare within a hundred yards
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 567 
 
 " of the spot at the Viceregal Lodge, where the murders were 
 " IMMEDIATELY known, where in fact they were witnessed. 
 " There is a cavalry barracks within half a mile. There 
 "was no absence of authority, for the Lord Lieutenant 
 " himself was on the spot, and the Commander of the 
 " forces living almost at the principal entrance to the park. 
 " The whole machinery of the Executive was complete. 
 " and all that was required was to set it in motion ; but it 
 " lay completely idle all night, and while every moment was 
 " precious, time was allowed to fly past as if it were of no 
 " value. An instantaneous or speedy pursuit might have 
 " tracked the villains before they became swallowed up in 
 " the crowd of the city, as it is supposed they have been, 
 " and before they could have removed the stains of guilt." 
 
 On the 1 8th of May, Mr. Redmond, the Home Rule 
 member, gave notice of the following question : " On 
 " Monday next I shall ask whether it is a fact that, during 
 " the time of the late Chief Secretary, special police were 
 " constantly on patrol in the vicinity of the Viceregal 
 " Lodge where the recent murders were committed ; whether 
 " the police were maintained there until the morning of the 
 " murders, and then suddenly withdraivn ; and who is 
 " responsible for this, and what steps are being taken in 
 " the matter ? " 
 
 As the Times of the I5th, however, contained the follow- 
 ing article, the notice of Mr. Redmond may not have been 
 suggested by his personal knowledge. "The four men, 
 " who for no private quarrel struck down Lord Frederick 
 "Cavendish and Mr. Burke in open day, with specially 
 " prepared weapons and at a special crisis of events, were 
 " the agents of a deed of which others were tJie first insti- 
 " gators. The thing done is a part and symptom of a well- 
 " organized conspiracy. Of this conspiracy we know little 
 " beyond the mere fact that it exists. How far it reaches, 
 " how many it includes, into what sections it is divided, who 
 " are its main movers, and in what country its headquarters 
 " are placed, are all points of which we have no certain infor-
 
 568 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " mation. But that a conspiracy tJiere is, of desperate and 
 "determined men, with an ample machinery at their com- 
 " mand, and exercising a terror over the whole length and 
 " breadth of Ireland, we are sure. . . . The secret society, 
 " which the Bill strikes at, exerts an influence for evil over 
 " the whole country in which its machinations are carried 
 " on. It is a presence hostile to freedom" 
 
 On the same day (May 15), there appeared an article, 
 headed " ASSASSINATION VICTORIOUS," in Archbishop 
 Croke's special organ, the Tipperary. Judge from that, the 
 cue he gave to the friends of the agitation, the new war- 
 cry he raised, the "new departure" he bade them take. It 
 began with the statement that " the assassins have won ; " 
 and that Sir W. Harcourt had announced that four mur- 
 derers had succeeded in upsetting the British Empire on 
 its vital Imperial policy, and in driving the British Govern- 
 ment into a state of panic ; " in other words, Sir W. 
 " Harcourt, on behalf of his Government, introduced on 
 " Thursday night the fiercest Coercion Bill ever fabricated 
 "for the better propagation of disaffection in Ireland. This, 
 " then, is the answer of this responsible Ministry, who rule 
 " them, to the wonderful outburst of abhorrence of crime, 
 " and fealty to peace and justice, by a generous people, 
 " within the last few days. Very good ; that is the 
 "Ministry's business. Let us look at their new panacea. 
 " If they meant it as a distinct message of blind, reckless 
 " hate to this country, they did well to get Sir William 
 " Harcourt to explain it." The writer, " whose Roman hand 
 " is unmistakable " (said the Times}, then observed, " And 
 " this is how Mr. Gladstone seizes this magnificent oppor- 
 " tunity put into his hands this week. . . . The nation 
 "that vanquished Mr. Forster are not likely to give up 
 " the ghost to his minor bully, Sir W. Harcourt." 
 
 That was the Roman Catholic Archbishop's war-cry : 
 an attack on bloodthirsty assassins, thought he, is an attack 
 on the Irish nation ! Thus he proclaimed that the Irish 
 nation and the murderous conspiracy were one. Thus he
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 569 
 
 put himself at their head, and led them on in the path of 
 bloody revenge. Thus he gave them hope, by proclaiming 
 that assassination had been victorious ! Was his doctrine 
 not the doctrine of Mariana the Jesuit, of Suarez the 
 Jesuit, and of most of the great Jesuit writers? Nay, it 
 was worse than their doctrine. They proclaimed that 
 king-killing was a righteous deed ; while Croke incited to 
 the murder of the Queen's officials. The Jesuits urged 
 the murder of Henri IV. because the king was a Protestant 
 at heart ; and the knife of Ravaillac killed him. Elizabeth 
 was a Protestant ; and the Jesuit Garnet planned her 
 murder. They were called tyrants because they were 
 Protestants, just as the British officials in Ireland are 
 called tyrants for being Protestants. And the Jesuits 
 teach that it is right to kill tyrants. 
 
 In the debate on the " Prevention of Crime Bill," on 
 May 24, Mr. Dawson, a Home Rule member, said, in 
 reference to the Phcenix Park murders : " Before the 
 " commission of the crime, the air was thick with rumours, 
 " and there were grave presentiments of some impending 
 " calamity throughout the city, too soon, unhappily, to be 
 " realized." Yet the police were withdrawn from the Vice- 
 regal Lodge, on the very morning of the arrival of Lord 
 Spencer and Lord F. Cavendish ; on the very morning 
 of the fatal day when the latter was murdered ! 
 
 On the evening of May 26, the following paragraph 
 stood alone in the St. James's Gazette : 
 
 " Treason and murder ever kept together, 
 As two yoke-devils, sworn to cither's purpose, 
 Working so grossly in a natural cause, 
 That admiration did not whoop at them. 
 But thou, 'gainst all proportion, dicFst bring in 
 Wonder, to wait on treason and on murder : 
 And whatsoever cunning fiend it was 
 That wrought upon thee so preposterously, 
 Hath got the voice in hell for excellence : 
 All other devils that suggest by treasons 
 Do botch and bungle up damnation
 
 570 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 With patches, colours, and with forms being fetch'd 
 
 From glistering semblances of piety ; 
 
 But he that temper'd thee bade thee stand up, 
 
 Gave thee no instance why thou shouldst do treason 
 
 Unless to dub thee with the name of traitor. 
 
 If that same demon that hath gulled thee thus 
 
 Should with his lion gait walk the whole world, 
 
 He might return to vasty Tartar back, 
 
 And tell the legions, * I can never win 
 
 * A soul so easy as that Englishman's.' 1 " 
 
 KING HENRY V., Act. II., Scene 2. 
 
 No. LXXVII. 
 
 ON the 1 5th of May, the House of Commons seemed 
 determined to know why Mr. Gladstone had liberated 
 Messrs, Parnell, Dillon & Co., as well as the convict 
 Davitt, whose release Archbishop Croke had commanded. 
 Thereupon Mr. Gladstone declined to produce the corre- 
 spondence, while Mr. Parnell volunteered it in the following 
 words : " I have a copy of a letter which I understand 
 " forms part of the documentary evidence alluded to in the 
 " question. It is a letter from myself to the hon. member 
 " for the county of Clare. It is headed, ' Private and 
 " ' confidential,' and is dated from Kilmainham, April 28, 
 " 1882. It is in the following terms : 
 
 " ' I was very sorry that you had left Albert Mansions 
 " ' before I reached London from Eltham, as I had wished 
 " ' to tell you that, after our conversation, I had made up 
 " ' my mind that it would be proper for me to put Mr. 
 " ' M'Carthy in possession of the views which I had pre- 
 " ' viously communicated to you. I desire to impress upon 
 " ' you tJu absolute necessity of a settlement of the arrears 
 " ' question which will leave no recurring sore connected 
 " ' with it behind, and which will enable us to show the 
 " ' smaller tenantry that they have been treated with 
 " ' justice and some generosity. The proposal you have 
 " ' described to me, as suggested in some quarters, of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 571 
 
 ' ' making a loan, over however many years the payment 
 "'might be spread, should be absolutely rejected, for 
 " ' reasons which I have already fully explained to you. 
 " l If the arrears question be settled upon the lines indicated 
 " ' by us, I have every confidence a confidence shared by my 
 " ( colleagues that the exertions which we should be able to 
 " ' make strenuously and unremittingly would be effective in 
 " ' stopping outrages and intimidation of all kinds. As re- 
 " 'gards permanent legislation of an ameliorative character, 
 " ' I may say that the views which you always shared with 
 "'me as to the admission of leaseholders to the fair-rent 
 " ' clauses of the Act are more confirmed than ever. So 
 " ' long as the flower of the Irish peasantry are kept out- 
 " ' side the Act there cannot be permanent settlement of 
 " ' the Land Act, which we all so much desire. I should 
 "'also strongly hope that some compromise might be 
 " ' arrived at this session with regard to the amendment of 
 " ' the tenure clauses. It is unnecessary for me to dwell upon 
 " ' the enormous advantage to be derived from the full ex- 
 " ' tension of the purchase clauses which noiu seems practically 
 " ' to have been adopted by all parties. The accomplishment 
 " ' of the programme I have sketched out to you would, in 
 " ' my judgment, be regarded by the country as a practical 
 " ' settlement of the land question, and I believe that the 
 " ' Government at the end of this session would, from the 
 " ' state of the country, feel themselves thoroughly justified 
 " ' in dispensing with further coercive measures. Yours very 
 "'truly, C. S. PARNELL.'" 
 
 Mr. Forster desired to ask the hon. member for the city 
 of Cork whether he had read the whole of the letter. 
 
 Mr. Parnell said : " I have not read from the original 
 " letter, but from a copy furnished me by the hon. and 
 " gallant member for Clare, and // is possible tJiat a 
 "paragraph has been omitted" 
 
 Mr. O'Shea said : " I have not the letter in question 
 " with me, and am, therefore, unable to read it. (A docu- 
 " ment was here handed to the hon. and gallant member
 
 572 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " by Mr. Forster.) A copy of the letter in question has 
 " been put into my hands, which I will read." The hon. 
 member then read the same letter as that read to the 
 House by the hon. member for Cork City, the concluding 
 paragraph of which was, however, in the following terms : 
 
 " The accomplishment of the programme I have sketched 
 "would, in my judgment, be regarded by the country as a 
 "practical settlement of the land question, and would, I 
 " feel sure, enable us to co-operate cordially for the future 
 "with the Liberal party in forwarding Liberal principles, 
 "and that the Government at the end of the session would, 
 " from the state of the country, feel themselves thoroughly 
 "justified in dispensing with future coercive measures." 
 
 Mr. Onslow desired to know whether the right hon. 
 gentleman, the Prime Minister, had seen the letter of the 
 hon. member for Cork before he informed the House that 
 no understanding had been arrived at between himself and 
 the hon. member for Cork before the Kilmainham suspects 
 were released. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone : " With regard to the question of the 
 " hon. member for Guildford, I may say that / had seen 
 " that letter. I did say, and I repeat it now, that there was 
 " not the slightest understanding of any kind. The hon. 
 "gentleman the member for the city of Cork asked 
 " nothing from us, and on our side we asked nothing from 
 "him." 
 
 At a much later period of the evening, or rather, the 
 next morning, the subject was recurred to, in the debate 
 on the Arrears Bill, which the Government had, that 
 evening, introduced. During that debate, Mr. Forster, the 
 late Secretary for Ireland, said, in reply to the hon. member 
 for Clare, Mr. O'Shea : " To a great extent I agree with 
 " the hon. member, that the matter arose out of a letter from 
 " the hon. member to my right hon. friend the Prime Minister. 
 " My right hon. friend knows it very well, for he sent me that 
 " letter, and when I sent it back to him I took precisely the 
 " same vieiv as that which I stated 1 took a few days ago in
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 573 
 
 " the House when explaining' the motives for my resignation, 
 " However, the negotiations or correspondence went on. The 
 "hon. member says he was in constant communication 
 " with me. I certainly did see him two or three times, but 
 "his communications consisted to a great extent of a lettet 
 " to the Prime Minister, and a communication to my righi 
 " hon. friend the President of the Board of Trade. The 
 " time came when it appeared to be desirable that the hon. 
 " member for Clare should see the hon. member for Cork 
 "at Kilmainham. There was a question by the hon. 
 " member for Newcastle as to what would be done with 
 " the members of Parliament who were under arrest ; and 
 " there was a question addressed to me on that subject. I 
 " happened to see the hon. member for Clare, and I told 
 "him the answer that I thought should be given. The 
 " question was, Would the Government release those mem- 
 "bers or not? and my reply was exactly in the same 
 "direction as what the House knows was my opinion. My 
 " opinion was that we could release them when either we 
 "got Ireland quiet, or got a fresh Bill with powers, or got 
 " a pledge from them without any conditions whatever that 
 " they would not break the law. I was not very exigeant ; 
 " I only asked them not to break the law. Ttie hon. 
 " member did not think that an advantageous answer, and 
 " the Prime Minister did not approve of it, and in conse- 
 " quence the question was not answered by me, but by him. 
 "The hon. member for Clare then went to Kilmainham, 
 " and I certainly facilitated his seeing the hon. member for 
 " Cork, precisely as I have facilitated many visits to persons 
 " detained under the Protection Act, whenever I had reason 
 " to believe, or any expectation, that the results would be 
 " such a promise of good behaviour as would enable me to 
 " recommend their release. I cannot say that I was very 
 " sanguine as to the result of the visit of the hon. member 
 " for Clare ; but he went to Kilmainham, and came to see 
 " me on Sunday morning. I am afraid I must really state 
 "the impression that his conversation gave me when he
 
 574 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " returned. I took a memorandum at the time, and I sent 
 " it to the Prime Minister, and circulated it among my' 
 "colleagues. It was to this effect : 
 
 " After telling me that he had been from 1 1 to 5 yester- 
 " day with Parnell, O'Shea gave me his letter to him, say- 
 " ing that he hoped it would be a satisfactory expression of 
 "union ivith the Liberal party. After carefully reading it, 
 " I said to him, 'Is that all, do you think, that Parnell would 
 " ' be inclined to say ? ' He said, ' What more do you want ? 
 " ' Doubtless, I could supplement! I said, ' It comes to this 
 " ' that upon our doing certain things, he will help us to 
 " ' prevent outrages ' or words to that effect. He again 
 " said, ' How can I supplement it ? ' referring, I imagine, 
 " to different measures. I did not feel justified in giving 
 " him my own opinion, which might be interpreted to be 
 " that of the Cabinet, so I said I had better show the letter 
 " to Mr. Gladstone and one or two others. He said, ' Well, 
 " ' there may be fault in expression, but the thing is done ; 
 " ' if these words will not do, I must get others, but what 
 " ' is obtained is ' (and here he used most remarkable words) 
 " ' that the conspiracy which has been used to get up boycotting 
 " < and outrages, will now be used to put them down! And 
 " that there will be a union in the Liberal party. And as 
 " an illustration of how the first of these results was to be 
 " obtained, he said that Parnell hoped to make use of a 
 " certain person and get him back from abroad, as he would 
 " be able to help him to put down conspiracy or agitation I 
 " am not sure which word was used as he knew all its 
 " details in the West. 
 
 " I added, for the information of my colleagues : 
 " ' This last statement is quite true this man Sheridan 
 " ' is a released suspect, against whom we have for some 
 " ' time had a fresh warrant, and who, under disguises, has 
 " ' hitherto eluded the police, coming backwards and forwards 
 " 'from Egan to the outrage-mongers in the West. I did not 
 " ' feel myself sufficiently master of the situation to let him 
 " ' see what I thought of this confidence, but I again told
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. . 575 
 
 " ' him that I could not do more at present than tell others 
 " ' what he had told me.' l 
 
 " Now, the situation is this. I was informed that if cer- 
 " tain things were done, if a Bill were brought forward, then 
 " the Jwn. member would cease front his illegal course, and 
 " would strive to help tJie law, and the illustration that was 
 " given was one that perfectly surprised me. It gave me a 
 " sort of insight into what had been happening, which I had 
 " not before that a man whom I knew, so far as I had any 
 "possibility of knowing, was engaged in these outrages, was 
 " so far under the influence of the hon. member for the city 
 " of Cork, that upon his release he would get the assistance of 
 " that man to put down the very things which Jie had been 
 "provoking. Well, I came away from that interview with 
 " this feeling : I was very sorry I had had anything what- 
 " ever to do with the negotiation, although all I had to do 
 " with it was, to have got from the hon. member for the 
 " city of Cork a promise not to break the law. I felt I 
 " would have nothing more to do with it. If it was possible 
 " to injure the power of the Government in Ireland, and to 
 " make it more difficult to preserve order, it was by entering 
 " into any arrangements with a gentleman who said : ' If 
 " ' 1 can get certain things done, then I will no longer 
 " ' instigate a breach of the law ; I will try and help you 
 " ' to keep it ; and I will even make use of agents, who 
 " ' have been used for the purposes of outrages, to put 
 " ' them down.' " 
 
 1 To show the character of Mr. Sheridan's agitation, the following 
 extracts from a speech of his at Lackagh, on August i, 1880, may be 
 appended. He kept a public-house at Tubbercurry. His words were : 
 " Mr. Chairman and fellow-countrymen, I feel proud at seeing you 
 "assembled here to-day in your thousands. We must assert our 
 " rights, and if we do not get them through our M.P.'s, I would ask 
 " you then to ring out your voices through the muzzles of'Minie' rifles 
 " as well as from those platforms. We have America at our back, and 
 " she is watching over us and helping us in the hours of our distress. 
 "... Most of us here will agree that the highest form of govern- 
 " ment is a Republic. Well, you may establish an Irish Republic on 
 " Irish soil ; but, as long as the tillers of that soil are forced to support 
 " a class, your Irish Republic would be but a mockery of freedom."
 
 576 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 The next day, the i6th, the House felt itself compelled 
 to recur to the subject The Government had got into a 
 very awkward position. There had evidently been some 
 very underhand negotiations. But the House and country 
 were as yet ignorant as to what might have been the real 
 object of them. We must remember that Parnell, Dillon, 
 and the others had, by the responsible authority of the 
 Government, been proclaimed as " steeped to the lips in 
 "treason." We must bear in mind that, at the trial of 
 Davitt, on July 18, 1870, it was sworn that he had attended 
 meetings of Fenians in Liverpool after the failure of the 
 Fenian attempt to blow up Chester Castle ; that he had 
 frequently deplored the failure of that attempt ; that he 
 had assisted to make arrangements for a rebellion in 
 Ireland ; that he had frequently discussed the plans for 
 raising the rebellion ; that he had written a letter (which 
 was produced), which gave directions as to how a Fenian 
 scheme of assassination should be carried out, and (to use 
 the words of the Lord Chief Justice) " some measure of the 
 " deepest atrocity " ; and, finally (to use again the words of 
 the Lord Chief Justice), that "there cannot be the shadow 
 " of a doubt that he bought those arms and sent them to 
 " Ireland, to be used in a Fenian rising there." And then 
 the Lord Chief Justice added, emphatically : 
 
 " There is one thing I cannot help regarding with a 
 " feeling of the utmost condemnation and horror, and that 
 " is that assassination is not considered as a means too 
 " desperate or bad to be resorted to when it is found con- 
 "venient to have recourse to it. That letter of yours 
 "shows that there was some dark and villainous design 
 "against the life of some man. The letter speaks for 
 " itself." 
 
 In addressing the Court before the sentence was de- 
 livered, Davitt did not deny the letter, nor the interpreta- 
 tion of it. 
 
 Those were the men whose release Archbishop Croke 
 had demanded, and whose release Mr. Gladstone had
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 577 
 
 determined on giving, against the advice and sanction of 
 the Lord Lieutenant and the Chief Secretary for Ireland ! 
 
 Of course (especially in the face of their two resignations), 
 some colour, some gloze had to be put upon the transac- 
 tion. The Land Leaguers, the suspects, the convict, were to 
 be liberated in order that they might assist the Government 
 in maintaining order ! But they were not to be asked to 
 give a promise that they would either do that, or even ab- 
 stain from promoting sedition, outrage, and assassination. 
 Mr. Gladstone saw that, even after that laborious glozing 
 of his real aim, the matter would wear a very ugly aspect 
 in the eyes of the British public. This was evident from 
 the anxiety and solicitude he evinced, to burke the " infor- 
 " mation " on which he and his Cabinet had proceeded. 
 He declined to give the "private correspondence," on the 
 ground that " it would tend to diminish the responsibility 
 "of the Government!" Mr. Parnell on the other hand 
 (who had never any real power except the power of an 
 instrument), feeling that his power was fast slipping away, 
 because that the ignorant masses thought he was making 
 a compact with the alien Government of England, he, 
 therefore, read out a garbled copy of his letter to Mr. 
 O'Shea. The omitted sentence revealed that a portion of 
 the compact was that Parnell should aid in the triumph of 
 Liberal principles. The rest of the bargain was, that if the 
 question of arrears should be settled on the lines of Mr. 
 Redmond's Bill, Parnell, Dillon, Davitt and Co., would 
 cease to promote outrage, sedition, and intimidation, and 
 would use their organization to assist in maintaining order. 
 
 We know the doctrine of Liguori and the Jesuit doctors, 
 of the permissibility of telling lies under certain circum- 
 stances. We have seen the understanding with the sus- 
 pects, and heard Mr. Gladstone's frequent and angry 
 denial of any understanding whatever ! Whether Mr. 
 Gladstone spoke the truth, rests with his own conscience. 
 The conspiracy which had established boycotting, inaugu- 
 rated a fearful system of intimidation, suggested outrages, 
 
 P P
 
 578 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 and connived at Mariana assassinations, was to have been 
 used by Mr. Gladstone to spread " Liberal principles ! " 
 Liberal principles ? The Liberalism of Suarez, the Liberal- 
 ism of Sheridan, not that of Englishmen. Mr. Gladstone 
 entered into this compact with the Land Leaguers. He 
 made a covenant with them, because they had established 
 a vast conspiracy and were members of a great organiza- 
 tion ; because they had inaugurated boycotting, maintained 
 a system of intimidation, and connived at assassination ! 
 He struck the bargain ; denied the bargain ; and carried 
 out the bargain. He liberated the suspects and convicts, 
 and introduced the Arrears Bill for the robbery of land- 
 lords. 
 
 That the discreditable affair was Mr. Gladstone's own, 
 was proved by another fact, which was stated by Mr. 
 Forster. Mr. Cowen had given notice of a question about 
 the release of the suspects. As the matter related to 
 Mr. Forster's department, he was intending to answer the 
 question : " My opinion was that we could release them 
 "when either we got Ireland quiet, or got a fresh Bill with 
 " powers, or got a pledge from them, without any con- 
 " ditions whatever, that they would not break the law. I 
 "was not very exigeant ; I only asked them not to break 
 "the law." Now mark the concurrence which existed 
 between the Prime Minister and the Land Leaguers. 
 An identity of aim, an identity of feeling, an identity of 
 thought Mr. Forster continued : " The honourable member 
 " did not think that an advantageous answer, and the Prime 
 "Minister did not approve of it; and in consequence the 
 "question was not answered by me, but by him" That is, 
 by Mr. Gladstone himself. 
 
 It is plain, too, that Mr. O'Shea, the Land Leaguer, was 
 Mr. Gladstone's plenipotentiary, his ambassador, not to 
 Parnell, but to the Chief Secretary, to wheedle Mr. 
 Forster over to Mr. Gladstone's views. Mr. Forster re- 
 corded in his official memorandum, written at the time 
 for the use of the Cabinet, the words of Captain O'Shea :
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 579 
 
 " THE THING IS DONE, if these words will not do, I must 
 " get others ; but WHAT IS OBTAINED IS that the conspiracy, 
 " which has been used to gel up boycotting and outrages, will 
 " now be used to put them down ; and there will be a union in 
 "the Liberal party." The thing had been done. It had been 
 agreed between Mr. Gladstone and Mr. Parnell. 
 
 As to the Arrears Bill, which had just been introduced 
 by Mr. Gladstone, we must remember that Mr. Parnell 
 had said : " If the Arrears question be settled upon the lines 
 " indicated by us" then order shall be restored, and crime 
 shall cease. 
 
 Now the Bill of Mr. Gladstone, and that of Mr. Redmond 
 were amazingly similar ; and Mr. Gladstone was anxious, 
 in his speech on introducing the Bill, to show that they 
 were almost identical. He compared them step by step, 
 and pointed out the coincidences ; as much as to say, 
 " See ! I have fulfilled my part of the bargain, now fulfil 
 "yours." The settlement was to be compulsory on the 
 landlord, not voluntary ; by gift to the tenant, not by way 
 of loan. Both Bills were confined to tenancies of 30 
 a year and under, by Griffith's valuation. A year's rent 
 only, of the arrears, was to be paid by the tenant ; the. rest 
 was to be wiped out, the State paying for the defaulter 
 a sum not exceeding one year's rent, or half the arrears ; 
 and so forth. 
 
 It was remarkable that, although tenants who paid any 
 rent were always shot by the Land League, and their 
 houses burned down, Parnell agreed that the outrages and 
 intimidation should cease, if the tenants should pay one 
 year's arrear of rent under the Arrears Bill ! But then 
 the landlord was to be robbed of the remainder. 
 
 It was also remarkable, as noticed by the Times, that 
 the negotiations at Kilmainham began at the middle of 
 April (April 13), and that, at the very time, the press 
 began to write down Mr. Forster as incapable, and his 
 administration in Ireland as a failure.
 
 5So RECE\T EVEXTS, AND A 
 
 No. LXXVIII. 
 
 Ox the 2 ist of May, 1882, Cardinal McCabe, who had 
 been alone in denouncing the crimes of the Land League, 
 returned from Rome, whither he had gone to receive the 
 Cardinal's hat. Instead of there being a demonstration by 
 crowds of Irish, according to custom, to welcome a Romanist 
 bishop on his return from the Pope, not three persons met 
 him at the station ; and that evening his hall door was 
 hung with crape. The same day, Dr. Croke received an 
 address in Galbally, in the County Tipperary, and said that 
 " the address, together with a demonstration in the same 
 " district a couple of days before, afforded convincing proof 
 " to /tint, if proof were needed, thai tlie priests and people of 
 " Ireland were thoroughly united. . . . Now he, as one of 
 "the Irish bishops, would earnestly call on the Govern - 
 " ment to pause in tJteir coercive career, to settle substantially 
 u the land question, to consult in future, with a view to tJte 
 "government of Ireland, t/te friends of the country rattier 
 " tfian its enemies ; and he would promise tliem that, if they 
 " did so, peace and prosperity would be as manifest in a 
 " short time as disturbance and uncertainty were at 
 " present" 
 
 " The friends of the country " doubtless meant himself 
 and those who shared his views regarding the Land 
 League, and the love of " martial music," and the necessity 
 of being " resolute " and " not moderate," and so forth. 
 The "people of Ireland" had lately gone beyond that 
 limit, and had claimed the absolute abolition of landlords, 
 the separation of Ireland from England, and the use of 
 outrages and assassination as means to those ends. " The 
 " priests," said the Archbishop, " were thoroughly united 
 " with the people of Ireland " in holding those views. Lest 
 there should be any mistake concerning the views of the 
 people of Ireland, we may quote a letter sent by the Rev. 
 J. Stewart Perowne, Dean of Peterborough, to the editor of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 581 
 
 the Times, and published in the number of May 22. The 
 letter was written to the Dean from Dublin : " I was in 
 " the procession entering Dublin, and heard one man say, 
 " as the Lord Lieutenant passed, ' / hope you may be shot 
 " ' down like a thrush before you get to the Castle' Another 
 " man, just released from prison, whose father lives in our 
 " parish, said, after his liberation, ' There will be no peace for 
 " ' Ireland till every Protestant is killed' " 
 
 The St. James s Gazette of the same evening contained 
 another sign of the feeling of Ireland. The Council of the 
 Fenian Brotherhood had issued a manifesto to all the Irish 
 in America and the English Colonies, as well as to those 
 in Ireland. The manifesto contained the following passage : 
 " Awake, arise, in solemn secret conclave, continue with 
 " augmented force, give emphasis, dagger, fire, sword, and 
 " other available resources of civilization to our imperishable 
 "hatred of our ancient, merciless, unrelenting enemy, to 
 " destroy whom we shall use, while life endures, every means 
 " -within reach of human effort. We proclaim our unswerv- 
 " ing fidelity with ancient Gospel force ; we authoritatively 
 " declare you are to regard recent events merely as a cloud 
 " the size of a man's hand on the horizon, clearly indicating 
 " what will infallibly follow in the near future. To our 
 " brethren of every Irish secret revolutionary organization 
 " we now solemnly declare that the watchword of the hour 
 " has gone forth ; we pledge ourselves to apply all our 
 " resources with redoubled energy and devotion, and with 
 " even a ferocity equal to that of our arch-enemy, to the 
 " great work confronting us the destruction and annihila- 
 " tion of British power in Ireland!' 
 
 That was a nice specimen of Archbishop Croke's friends 
 and the "friends of the country"! Such as these, his 
 Grace asserted the priests of Ireland to be ! 
 
 The Times of the same day contained a report of a 
 speech made by the ticket-of-leave convict, Michael Davitt, 
 when presiding at a large Land League meeting in Man- 
 chester. He "was enthusiastically received by the large
 
 582 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " audience, pointed to the great change which had come 
 " over public opinion upon the subject of land reform 
 " during his incarceration in Portland, and defended the 
 " movement by the aid of which such a revolution in the 
 " popular mind had been effected. ... It was for 
 " Englishmen to make up their mind what course to 
 " pursue in furtherance of English political interests ; the 
 "people of Ireland Jiad fully made up theirs as to what was 
 " their just demand, and what the sentence that must be passed 
 " on Irish landlordism. . , . The Prime Minister deceived 
 " liimself egregiously if he believed that the Land League 
 " movement was about to efface itself all the world over, be- 
 " cause he had been converted to Mr. ParnelVs views upon 
 " the arrears question, and had accepted the services of Mr. 
 " O'Shea in effecting the treaty of Kilmainham. The Land 
 " League movement was organized to effect a complete 
 " abolition of Irish landlordism, and until that work was 
 " fully and completely accomplished there could be no 
 " alliance between the people of Ireland and the Whig 
 " party of this country. Mr. Gladstone wanted Ireland to 
 " give a trial to his second attempt to settle the land ques- 
 " tion, but the people of Ireland would refuse to give any 
 " further trial to Irish landlordism. . . . The concession 
 " upon the arrears question was offered side by side with a 
 " Bill which was really intended to arrest the further public 
 "action of the people of Ireland towards the abolition of 
 " landlordism. Had Mr. Gladstone been in the confidence of 
 " the secret societies, he could not have more completely played 
 " into their hands" 
 
 The Irish Times determined to clinch the nail. It boldly 
 asserted that Davitt's speech was " a striking and positive 
 " repudiation of the Kilmainham Treaty ; that Davitt dis- 
 " sented from the course of Mr. Parnell ; and told Mr. 
 " Gladstone that he had gained nothing by his great 
 "humiliation. The Land League (he said) was not to 
 " be affected by the new experiment in legislation the 
 " Arrears Bill, which had arisen out of the Kilmainham
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 583 
 
 " bargain any more than by the negotiations of Captain 
 " O'Shea." 
 
 This brings us, indeed, to the consideration of the Arrears 
 Bill the part of the Government in the Kilmainham con- 
 tract. The moment the Bill had been introduced, it was 
 observed that the payment of rents was stopped all over 
 Ireland. Tenants greedily sought after the pecuniary ad- 
 vantages promised by the Bill, to those who would consent 
 to defraud and rob their landlords. The landlords were, 
 therefore, at once put in a worse position than before. 
 Another curious result of the introduction of the Bill was 
 a movement among those tenants who had already paid 
 their rents, to have a " rebate " of that money handed back 
 to them. 
 
 Before this time, when a tenant was in arrear, the tenant- 
 right of the farm could be sold, and the landlord be paid his 
 arrears out of the proceeds, while the tenant received the 
 remainder. The Bill proposed to do away with that equit- 
 able system, by defrauding the landlord, by handing the 
 tenant a year's rent if he was in arrear and could not pay, 
 and wiping out the balance of the arrears. But how was 
 the tenant to prove that he could not pay ? and if he could 
 prove it, how soon would his case come on for hearing ? 
 Perhaps not for four or five years ; and in the meanwhile 
 all rents and arrears were to be in abeyance, and the land- 
 lord was to be starved out. Thus the Bill proposed to do 
 a grievous wrong to the landlord ; to do nothing for the 
 honest tenant ; to grant a boon to dishonesty, by making 
 a gift to the dishonest and insolvent tenant ; and finally, 
 to discourage for the future all payments of rent. 
 
 Moreover, the Bill seemed to contain a direct induce- 
 ment to the utterance of falsehood, and the commission 
 of fraud. It was indeed said to be a curriculum for 
 teaching swindling. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone estimated that only one-third (say 200,000) 
 of the tenants under 30 holdings (which amounted to 
 585,000) would come under the operation of the Act ;
 
 584 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 that a sum of two millions would cover their arrears ; and 
 that the balance of the Church Temporalities Fund would 
 nearly meet that demand. On that point the Times of 
 May 22 gave the following caution : 
 
 " It must not be forgotten that, with all the Prime Minis- 
 " ter's financial ability, some of his estimates in connection 
 " with Irish affairs have been very wide of the mark. The 
 " Church Surplus was found to be much less than the 
 " amount computed on the introduction of the Disestablish- 
 " ment Bill. The cost of working the Land Act has proved 
 " to be vastly greater than was supposed a year ago. The 
 " assumption, therefore, that the charge upon the Con- 
 " solidated Fund will not exceed half a million sterling is 
 " one which should be entertained with much reserve." 
 
 Not only was that charge, of misleading the House, 
 brought forward by the leading journal, but other journals 
 announced the " intention of the Government to force the 
 " Arrears Bill through the House of Commons with scan- 
 "dalous and totally unjustifiable haste." On the 22nd of 
 May, after a short debate of one night, Mr. Gladstone 
 objected to an adjournment, and divided the House against 
 it, saying that the speeches of the opponents had dealt with 
 extraneous matters (an assertion which was at once met 
 with an unqualified contradiction from Sir Stafford North- 
 cote). The advocacy, or rather defence, of the measure 
 " was feeble in the extreme," and " practically no defence 
 " was made to the attacks from the Opposition benches." 
 Even the Daily News remarked the refinement in Mr. 
 Gladstone's cruelty to the landlords of Ireland : not only 
 were the Protestant landlords to be defrauded of their 
 arrears, but the Protestant taxpayers of England and 
 Scotland were to be mulcted to aid the Roman Catholic, 
 or rather, Fenian, tenants of Ireland. The Daily News 
 did not see in the matter, it is true, the thread of the 
 religious question ; it spoke merely of hardship and of 
 economical principles. It then rehearsed Mr. Gladstone's 
 admission that the measure was " exceptional and extra-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 585 
 
 " ordinary," and urged in conclusion that, as the conditions 
 were extraordinary, the sacrifice should be made. The 
 Morning Advertiser called the Land Act and the supple- 
 mentary Bill " revolutionary " measures ; and said that 
 " Irish landlordism had been too deeply shaken, by the 
 " blows administered to it during the past twelve years, to 
 " remain a permanent and influential factor of the social 
 " fabric " ; wherefore it thought it better to have a peasant 
 proprietary in Ireland at once, and " enable the landlords 
 " to take themselves out of a country where living had 
 " been irksome for all, and intolerable for many." The 
 Glasgow Herald could not see why the fair and just land- 
 lords of Ireland " the great majority, as the Premier told 
 " us last year " should be treated as hardly as the rack- 
 renters ; while the honest tenant did not receive the boon 
 extended to " the mean rascal who, it may be under a low 
 " rent, can point to his hoard as proof that there is no good 
 " in a moral code." 
 
 The St. James's Gazette (May 23) considered the Arrears 
 Bill to be something else than it pretended to be. It was 
 not a measure for relieving the distressed ; it was rather 
 a scheme for " rewarding the dishonest and bribing the 
 " violent," for " rewarding the dishonest who had thriven 
 " by violence. It was meant to buy off Captain Moonlight, 
 " and to secure their gains to those tenants for whom the 
 " Captain acted." " They would see that the Government 
 " reserved its gifts for the unscrupulous, and that the 
 " rogues were too strong for the law." 
 
 In the debate on the second reading of the Arrears Bill, 
 Mr. Childers, the. Secretary at War. made an important, 
 but suicidal statement. He said that a tenant was not 
 to be held " unable to pay his arrears," until he had 
 exhausted his power of raising money on the tenant- 
 right of his holding. If so, the tenant must first have 
 borrowed, at a ruinous rate of interest, from the village 
 attorney or " Gombeen man," as much as could be got on 
 the security of his tenant-right, before he could claim any
 
 5 86 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 of the benefits of the Arrears of Rent Act. That is to say, 
 that the landlord was to be defrauded of the arrears due 
 to him, even though the robbery should not in any way 
 benefit the tenant. For the tenant was to be screwed in the 
 vice of a hard-hearted country attorney, or money-lender, 
 in order to free him from the presence of a tender-hearted 
 and indulgent landlord ! The aim of Mr. Gladstone in 
 carrying the Arrears Bill, was therefore not the good of 
 the tenant, but the ruin of the landlord ! 
 
 It was therefore not a wonderful thing that no Minister 
 was found to defend the principles of that extraordinary 
 measure ; for no one knew or could be brought to believe 
 the real aim of Mr. Gladstone's policy ; and his Ministers 
 were puzzled to reconcile the means provided in the clauses 
 of the Bill, with that which they had been told was the end 
 and aim of the measure. The objections to the Bill there- 
 fore remained unanswered, because unanswerable ; and 
 the second reading was passed, of a Bill which had the 
 appearance of a bribe to disaffection, an incentive to out- 
 rage and murder, an elixir of life to agitation, a sure means 
 for the demoralization of the people, a most dangerous 
 legislative precedent, a law most unjust to English tax- 
 payers, a reward to lawlessness, and a discouragement to 
 honesty. With all that, the bribe would not procure the 
 support which Mr. Gladstone said he desired, and would 
 not buy off the enemy which Mr. Gladstone professed to 
 oppose. Like the Dutch burghers, who sold powder and 
 shot to the enemy who had expended all their supply in 
 besieging the burghers' town, so Mr. Gladstone was held to 
 have encouraged the Fenian enemies of the British con- 
 nection, and bribed them to continue their fatiguing and 
 dangerous agitation. 
 
 The Times of the 25th displayed its sense of the incon- 
 gruous in the policy of the Government. " The notion 
 " that a system of pure conciliation and concession would 
 " restore order and peace and the authority of the law in 
 " Ireland, if the Government were wholly to abandon its
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 587 
 
 "repressive powers, is the figment of a distempered fancy. 
 ". . . Upon any view of Irish affairs, it must be re- 
 " cognised, unless we close our eyes deliberately to the 
 " facts, that we have to deal in Ireland with a form of dis- 
 " affection which is not only politically dangerous, but is 
 " subversive of all law, and can be met effectually by force 
 "alone." 
 
 The Times was merely expressing the mutterings of 
 Pall Mall clubs, and the whisperings of the salons. The 
 Government appeared to be not disconnected from the 
 Fenian intrigue. " The two Governments of Ireland " 
 (for men had been got to believe that there were two 
 Governments, which were not in sub- alternation) had 
 not even the appearance of mutual opposition. 
 
 No. LXXIX. 
 
 IN the debate on going into Committee on "The Pre- 
 "vention of Crime Bill," Mr. Dillon spoke as follows: 
 " I am not ashamed to say, in this House, that I have, in 
 " Ireland, publicly advocated ' boycotting.' . . . The 
 "hon. member for the county of Mayo has denounced 
 " ' boycotting ' as ' brutal and immoral.' Now, ' boy- 
 "'cotting' has kept the roof-tree over the heads of hun- 
 " dreds of poor families in the county of Mayo ; and I 
 "challenge that hon. member to resign his seat and go 
 " down with me to the constituency of Mayo, making his 
 " appeal on the question whether the doctrine of ' boy- 
 "'cotting' was 'brutal and immoral' or not. I have 
 " always held that ' boycotting ' is the minor of two evils, 
 " of which we have the choice. If I were an Englishman 
 " sitting on the Treasury bench, I would denounce ' boy- 
 " ' cotting ' ; but have you ever heard of lynch law ? I sup- 
 " pose, from its name, that it was started by an Irishman. 
 " If you had lived in mining camps in California or Aus- 
 " tralia, you would have been glad of the protection of lynch
 
 588 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " law, rather than be at the mercy of every ruffian. ... A 
 " blood tax can have no effect except to exasperate honest 
 " people, for the men who will be required to pay it are 
 "not those who commit the murders. Besides, if ter- 
 " rorism prevails to the extent it is alleged to do, the 
 " Irish peasant will rather pay a blood tax than risk his 
 "own life by coming forward to give evidence. A blood 
 " tax may make the Irish peasant sorry for a murder unless 
 " he obtains the advantage of it. Beyond that, it can only 
 " serve to impoverish the country and still further convince 
 " the people that justice is not to be had." 
 
 Mr. Gladstone followed, and said : " There are those in 
 " this House who may have some sympathy with the objects of 
 " the hon. member, but they are not prepared to go to tJie fear- 
 "ful lengths advocated by him. . . . What has been told 
 " us was deliberately, and even coldly spoken ; in perfect self- 
 -possession and not in the heat of the debate. He begins by 
 '* saying that he will refuse to denounce outrage so long as 
 " we refuse to denounce eviction. (' Hear, hear,' from the 
 " Irish members.) . . . Eviction is the exercise of an 
 "undoubted legal right, which, I admit, may involve the 
 " highest responsibility and even deep moral guilt upon the 
 " person exercising it ; but it is also the means of the 
 "establishment of those legal rights upon which existence 
 " and society depend, rights which have been deliberately 
 " and insolently denied, by men who audaciously refuse to 
 " perform their part of the contract ; men with money in 
 " their pockets, perhaps loaded with benefits by him whose 
 " rights they deny. That man is placed, by the declaration 
 "of the hon. member, on a level with those who commit 
 " outrages. . . . That these declarations should be made 
 " on behalf of the Irish people, that they should be scoffed 
 " at by the hon. member for Cavan these, sir, are among 
 " the gravest and most grievous facts that can carry sorrow 
 "to my heart, and rejoicing and mockery to the heart of 
 " the hon. member for Cavan. . . . The view he takes 
 "of murder, may be judged of from another passage of his
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 589 
 
 " speech. With great nalveti he let fall a sentence which 
 " opened to us the interior of his heart, and the sentence 
 " was this. He said : ' What will a mere blood tax do ? 
 "'It may make the Irish peasant sorry for the murder 
 " ' unless he obtains the advantage of it.' . . . The pro- 
 " cess called ' boycotting ' is, according to the hon. member, 
 " a legitimate and proper process. What is meant by boy- 
 "cotting? In the first place, it is combined intimidation. 
 " In the second place, it is combined intimidation made use 
 " of for the purpose of destroying the private liberty of choice 
 " by fear of ruin and starvation. In the third place, that 
 " being what boycotting is in itself, we must look to this, that 
 " the creed of boycotting, like every other creed, requires 
 "a sanction, and the sanction of boycotting that which 
 " stands in the rear of boycotting, and by which alone boy- 
 " cotting can in the long run be made thoroughly effective, 
 " is the murder which is not to be denounced. ... By 
 "boycotting, he means nothing but merely ruining men 
 " who claim to exercise their private judgment in a direc- 
 tion opposite to his. That is all he means. . . . 
 "The hon. gentleman becomes here the apostle of a 
 "different creed, which is a creed of force, of oppression, 
 " of the destruction of all liberty, and of the erection of 
 "a despotism upon its ruins, a despotism differing from 
 " every other despotism only in this, that it is more abso- 
 lutely detached from all law, all tradition, and all restraint. 
 " The hon. gentleman says that if Her Majesty's Govern- 
 " ment will abandon coercion, and if they will recast the 
 " Land Act, then the land question may be settled on the 
 " basis of legal agitation. There is the groundwork of the 
 " new treaty offered by the hon. gentleman. What he means 
 "by the abandonment of coercion, is that no Bill of re- 
 " straint is to be introduced against any evil-doers whatever 
 "in Ireland." 
 
 If Mr. Dillon's speech had been merely words, and had 
 not revealed the intentions of a great power behind him, 
 then it would have incurred reprobation, but would have
 
 590 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 merited neglect. But he spoke the deliberate mind of the 
 secret Fenian conspiracy, and revealed the colour of its 
 every-day coat, the Land League. When Mr. Gladstone 
 heard that speech, he spoke to the House of Commons as 
 the Prime Minister who had been responsible for the state 
 of Ireland during the last two years ; who had introduced 
 measures for the amelioration of Ireland, as if he were the 
 only man who understood the case ; and yet as a man 
 who was so surprised at the discovery of the intentions of 
 the Land League, as to be utterly "heart-broken !" The 
 most horrible crimes had for two years been going on ; 
 and Mr. Gladstone had sat unmoved. An Irishman made 
 a calm and deliberate speech, and Mr. Gladstone was 
 " heart-broken." He cried, " Give me a little water, Titania ! 
 "Titania, I am sick" of despair! Mr. Dillon advocated 
 boycotting, and refused to denounce boycotting, and even 
 coquetted with murder ; he appeared as the apologist for 
 a state of Ireland to which we had become accustomed, 
 and Mr. Gladstone said he was "heart-broken!" Mr. 
 Dillon's position was exactly the same as that which had 
 been taken by Mr. Gladstone in the " Kilmainham Treaty." 
 Mr. Dillon said : " I will insure that outrages shall cease 
 " if you will stop evictions ; and, when you have settled 
 " the land question as we desire, you shall find Ireland 
 "pacified." Was not that the bargain which had been 
 struck at Kilmainham about three weeks before ? 
 
 It was remarked that, before the debate had begun on 
 the 24th, Mr. Forster volunteered a personal explanation 
 on his resignation, and said : " The facts were as I have 
 " already stated them. / was cognisant of the negotiations 
 " to which the right hon. gentleman alluded, although the 
 " time came when I felt I could no longer share in the 
 " responsibilities connected with them. As regards these 
 " negotiations, I would never have made any reference to 
 "the subject had it not been referred to by others." 
 
 Thus Mr. Forster, on the 24th, deliberately volunteered 
 the information, that negotiations had been carried on, and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 591 
 
 that the time had come during the progress of the nego- 
 tiations, when he felt " he could no longer share " with Mr. 
 Gladstone " the responsibilities connected with them." 
 To " receive information " would have been a duty, and 
 could involve no responsibility. To conduct negotiations 
 does involve responsibility. The negotiations had endured 
 some time, and then had reached a point when Mr. Forster 
 felt he must withdraw from them, and refuse to share the 
 responsibility, by resigning ; because he found that the 
 negotiations were being carried on in spite of him. 
 
 The same number of the Times (25th), which contained 
 the report of that debate, contained also a remarkable 
 speech of Lord Salisbury at Stratford. " I do not know 
 "whether you noticed a letter addressed to the Standard 
 " by Mr. Staples, an Irish magistrate, a few days after the 
 " Dublin tragedy. He says : ' About a year ago, I had 
 " 'occasion as a magistrate to see Mr. Burke on business 
 " ' connected with the state of the country. I told him 
 " ' what I thought, and lamented the troubled and danger- 
 " ' ous state into which we were drifting, and his answer 
 " ' was, " We may thank Mr. Gladstone for it all." ' Now 
 " that is the solution to which, I think, a calm examination 
 " of the recent connection of this country with Ireland will 
 " lead every one who devotes his attention to it. ... You 
 " know he has preached about the abolition of the Irish 
 " Church, when he spoke of the outrages in Clerkenwell 
 " bringing that question ' within the range of practical 
 " ' politics.' ... I go from that measure to what happened 
 " two years ago. Lord Beaconsfield dissolved the late 
 " Parliament, warning the people of this country of the 
 "struggle impending over them warning them that an 
 " effort was being made to disintegrate the Empire, which 
 " would be more dangerous than pestilence and famine ; 
 " but the result of that warning was that the Liberal party 
 " threw tliemselves into the hands of the Irish votirs. ... As 
 "payment for that support the Land Act was introduced, of 
 " which I will not discuss the individual provisions, but it
 
 592 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " may be described in this simple phrase, that it was a 
 " measure for the transfer of a quarter of tlie property of the 
 " landlords, or what had been regarded as the property of 
 " the landlords, to the tenants who were in the occupation 
 "of the land. What is more of importance to my argu- 
 " ment, it was a measure directly in the teeth of the assur- 
 " ances by which Mr. Gladstone had forced upon Parliament 
 "and passed the Act of 1870 the direct reversal of those 
 " principles of free contract which he had then laid down 
 " in the most emphatic terms were to be the permanent 
 " guide. We know from Mr. Chamberlain that the Land 
 " League was looked upon by the Government as a very useful 
 " auxiliary in passing the Land Act. . . . No application of 
 " the coercive powers was made against the leaders of the Irish 
 " movement until the moment the Land Act was passed, and 
 " then Mr. Gladstone commenced his third lesson to the 
 " Irish malcontents. . . . The third and most impor- 
 " tant point is this, that this man with whom this compact 
 " was made, and on whose behalf the powers given by the 
 " Legislature were exercised, was in prison on a charge of 
 " treasonable practices. One of two things must be true. 
 " Either at the moment before he was let out, there was no 
 "ground for the charge made of treasonable practices, 
 " and in that case he was the most deeply injured of men ; 
 " or else, when he was let out without having given any 
 " security that the treasonable practices with which he was 
 " charged should cease, Mr. Gladstone was bartering the 
 " interests of the Empire for Parliamentary advantage. 
 " Now we come to the fourth lesson tJiat has been given to 
 "the Irish malcontents, and it has been given quite recently. 
 " I do not think that the nature of this Arrears Bill is 
 " really present to the minds of the English people. . . . 
 " I wish you to look at it merely as a lesson which Mr. 
 "Gladstone gives to the malcontents in Ireland with whom 
 " he has to deal. What is the A rrears Bill ? It is a Bill for 
 " paying other peoples debts, and paying them out of the funds 
 " to which those people have no claim. . . . What I wish
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 593 
 
 "you to centre your attention upon is the proposal to pay 
 " the debts of the Irish tenant-farmers out of the Consolidated 
 "Fund. . . . 
 
 "You may be told that they were seriously distressed in 
 " 1878 and 1879 ; but did the sun refuse to shine in 1878 and 
 " 1879 i Ireland alone ? I believe that there are parts of 
 "this country which have suffered more deeply from the 
 " adverse seasons than any part of Ireland. ... In each of 
 " these four cases the Irish tenant has been taught by the 
 " powerful preaching of facts the most powerful kind of 
 "preaching there is that outrage will obtain from the 
 " English Government concessions which can be obtained 
 " in no other way, and that obedience to the law is not so 
 " profitable as breaking the law that committing a series 
 " of agrarian crimes, which have now for so long disgraced 
 "the country, is repaid by the English Government by 
 " handing money from the Irish Church, from the pockets 
 " of the Irish landlords, and from the pockets of the English 
 " taxpayers to those who have committed the outrages, in 
 " order that they may be kind enough to commit them no 
 " longer. . . . Depend upon it, that it is a mistake to think that 
 " this terrible problem of Ireland arises because of the evils 
 " that exist in Ireland itself. It is a symptom of the general 
 "disease of the body politic the disease, the symptoms 
 " of which show themselves at the extremities, is really at 
 "the heart. IT is THE HEART, THE GOVERNMENT IN 
 " ENGLAND, THAT CAUSES ALL THE TROUBLES WHICH 
 
 " YOU HAVE TO FIGHT IN IRELAND. . . . When that pro- 
 "cess has been repeated four times, I imagine that a 
 " less suspicious person than an Irish peasant sees through 
 " the shallow pretence of justice. If these things were 
 "just, they would have been granted long ago; if they 
 "are not just, no change in the circumstances of Ireland 
 " could make them so. No consideration of expediency 
 " can make it just to empty the purses of English tax- 
 payers into the pockets of Irish tenants. Mr. Gladstone 
 " never spoke a truer word than when he said that we 
 
 Q Q
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " were in the presence of a social revolution. Who has 
 " caused this revolution it is unnecessary to inquire, but 
 "you cannot compromise with it" 
 
 Lord Salisbury had evidently his suspicions (although 
 he carefully guarded himself from expressing them too 
 openly) that Mr. Gladstone had been "consciously and 
 " intentionally " keeping the agitation alive. 
 
 The Times may have had its suspicions too. At all 
 events, it said, on the 25th : "The unwisdom, not to use a 
 "stronger word, of this sort of dalliance with the Home 
 " Rule spirit, at the very time when it has been plainly shown 
 " to what ends that spirit is tending, is to be censured. . . . 
 " The separatist movement in Ireland, with its subversive social 
 " characteristics, is disclosed, still more completely than by Mr. 
 " Dillon's speech, in a letter written by Davitt to the Roman 
 " Catholic Bishop of Meath. That prelate had made himself 
 " conspicuoiis as an exponent of doctrines, relating to property 
 " in land, not distinguishable from those of the most advanced 
 " of Continental Socialists." Those sentences seemed some- 
 what uncalled for, until the following announcement ap- 
 peared in the Morning Post of the following day : " There 
 " is much reason for believing that Mr. Gladstone, who has 
 " already indicated his adhesion to the desirability of giving 
 "consideration to the plea for ' Home Rufe,' is contemplating 
 "another 'new departure' and a fresh plan for settling 
 " Irish difficulties on the basis of four great provincial 
 "councils for the four provinces of Ireland, This, it is 
 " contended, would afford a large and satisfactory concession 
 " of local self-government. We need hardly point out that 
 " these great local councils would expect to have the police 
 " subordinate to them, and that they would on their very 
 " first meeting vote for the principle of unity, and seek to 
 "transfer their divided authority to one seat in College 
 " Green. The Premier is daily teaching the Irish that they 
 " have only to ask and to receive ; that they need but 'ring 
 " ' the chapel bell ' to obtain their most extravagant wishes." 
 
 The other allusion in that extract from the Times was
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 595 
 
 to a letter, from the Fenian convict Davitt, to Dr. Nulty, 
 the Bishop of Meath. In that letter, he said that the Land 
 Act of 1 88 1 was "only one or two degrees less of a com- 
 "plete failure than the Land Act of 1870"; that the 
 system which had endured since the accession of King 
 William III., "200 years ago," was "hopelessly unsuited 
 "to the genius and interests of our race"; and that they 
 " refused landlordism any more trials whatever," and must 
 have no more "temporary expedients," but "a radical 
 " measure the only logical and final settlement of agrarian 
 " strife in Ireland." Mr. Davitt received an official letter 
 from the Bishop's house at Navan, saying that his letter 
 had been read, by the Bishop, to all his clergy assembled at the 
 Ecclesiastical Conference, and that it had been received " with 
 " universal and enthusiastic applause" and that the Bishop 
 would "take the earliest opportunity of acknowledging 
 " personally the receipt of Davitt's splendid and most wel- 
 "come communication." 
 
 Sir R. Cross, on May 25, expressed his just suspicions 
 and misgivings, in the following manner : " He believed it 
 " was due to the action of Her Majesty s Government that 
 " those secret societies had been allowed to revive ; and it was 
 " in consequence of that action of the Government that those 
 " secret societies, having revived, the House was now bound to 
 "support tJtem in those very stringent measures for the 
 " purpose of putting them down. ... It would be the 
 " duty of the Opposition to watch with vigilance that Her 
 " Majesty's Government did not go back upon their steps. If 
 '' the Government retired in the least degree from the position 
 " they had taken up, the country would be of opinion that they 
 " were not in earnest in this matter after all." 
 
 The statements of Sir R. Cross were, that the revival of 
 the activity of the Fenian and kindred secret societies was 
 due to the action of Mr. Gladstone's Government, and that 
 it was therefore the duty of the Conservative Opposition 
 to support Mr. Gladstone. He moreover expressed a 
 strong suspicion that Mr. Gladstone would retrace his steps
 
 595 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 from the Coercion Bill, or allow it to be whittled away 
 until it should have become ineffective, in which case the 
 country would at last arrive at the conclusion that the 
 Government were not at all in earnest about the matter. 
 Lastly, he asserted that the Arrears of Rent Bill had been 
 so framed that it would increase instead of diminishing the 
 agitation in Ireland. 
 
 The Times seemed to have shared those suspicions, for 
 it said, on May 26 : " It is necessary for the House to bear 
 " in mind that the value of the Prevention of Crime Bill 
 " consists in its operation as a whole, and in its moral im- 
 " pression upon the popular mind in Ireland. If it is to 
 " be whittled away, in deference to technical objections or 
 " through fear of affronting constitutional commonplaces, it 
 " would be better for Parliament frankly to turn the cheek 
 " to the smiter without wincing." 
 
 No. LXXX. 
 
 THE Univers, of Paris, the organ of the Jesuits, contained, 
 on May 29, a letter from an Irish priest. That priest 
 began by complimenting the Univers on its sympathy 
 with Davitt, Parnell, Devoy, and the other land agitators. 
 He protested against the opinion that Mr. Davitt's gospel 
 of " the land belonging to the people " was Communism. 
 He added that an ever-increasing number of the priesthood 
 of Ireland approved of that cry, which he considered a 
 proof that such a doctrine was not Communism, seeing 
 that Communisn had been condemned by the Roman 
 Church. Mr. Davitt, he said, was moreover a disciple of 
 a good Roman Catholic, namely, Mr. Patrick Ford. An 
 additional proof of the orthodoxy of the cry was found by 
 the priests, in the fact that Bishop Nulty had maintained 
 and still held the doctrine of the common property of the 
 nation in the soil. He added, that if some sympathisers 
 in the land agitation, dwelling in France, America, or else- 
 where, should go still further, it was not to be regretted ;
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 597 
 
 and that he was ready to co-operate with them in such 
 a good work. This meant, obviously, that he was ready 
 to throw himself into the arms of M. Rochefort and the 
 other Socialists. The Univers gave prominence to this 
 letter, without a word of condemnation, not even a syllable 
 of warning to its readers ; nor so much as an apology to the 
 public for its reproduction ! Yet it must have known the 
 recent action of the Socialists of London ; for we learned 
 from the St. James's Gazette of May 26, that at a recent 
 meeting of the Social Democratic Working Men's Club, 
 in London, a resolution had been unanimously adopted 
 " highly approving of the courageous deed l of the Irish 
 " rebels, which act was especially well-timed, inasmuch as 
 " it took place at a moment when certain chiefs of the 
 " Land League party were upon the point of entering into 
 " a shameful treaty with the English Government." A 
 similar resolution had also been passed by the London 
 Communistischer Arbeiterbildungsverein also. The Univers 
 must have known this ; and yet it approved of Socialism ! 
 On May 31, 1882, Mr. Smith said at Southampton: 
 "On the 4th of April Mr. Gladstone said: 'The other 
 " ' point to which the hon. member has not referred, and 
 " ' which appears to me to be by far the gravest subject, is 
 " ' the absence of evidence that outrages in Ireland are not 
 " ' associated with some influence behind them higher than 
 " ' that which belongs to those who commit the outrages. It 
 " ' is not for me to explain that influence ; but undoubtedly, 
 " ' I should be very glad to be assured that the funds of 
 " 'the Land League were not made available for the com- 
 "' mission of the outrages.' Mr. Gladstone charges the 
 " Land League with providing funds out of which pay- 
 " ment for these outrages was made. This was the charge 
 " brought by him against the leaders of the Land League 
 " on April 4, and within a few weeks they were out of 
 " gaol. They are gentlemen with whom Mr. Gladstone is 
 44 believed to be on friendly terms. Mr. Davitt, a released 
 1 The Phoenix Park murders.
 
 593 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "suspect, a convict says, in his speech at Manchester, 
 " that ' Mr. Gladstone's temporary expedient of fixing rents 
 " ' may satisfy some and frighten others, but he deceives 
 "'himself if he believes the anti-landlord movement will 
 " ' efface itself because he has been converted to Mr. ParneWs 
 "'views, and Jias accepted the services of Mr. O 1 Shea in 
 "' effecting tJie treaty of KilmainJiam! We have it herein 
 " evidence that there was a treaty of Kilmainham, that 
 " Mr. Gladstone was converted to the views of Mr. Parnell, 
 " and that Mr. Parnell and other gentlemen were instantly 
 " let out of prison. Mr. Davitt announces, in his Man- 
 " Chester speech, that he is commencing an agitation not 
 " to be met by any of those concessions which Mr. Glad- 
 " stone has made, and that the object is to be the complete 
 " abolition of landlordism in Ireland, and the substantial 
 " independence of the country, as far as England is concerned. 
 " This is a grave matter, because there can be no doubt 
 " that these men rebel against the Union. They are resolved 
 " upon the dissolution of that union, and the land agitation 
 " was but a lever used for the attainment of their object? 
 
 There was a plain, unvarnished statement of facts, by 
 Mr. Smith. The deplorable condition of Ireland was, by 
 his strong common sense, traced to the action of Mr. 
 Gladstone's Government. The occult and mysterious 
 " influence behind," was hinted at ; and the ulterior aim 
 of the whole agitation was plainly stated ; namely, the 
 complete abolition of the Irish landlords, and the separa- 
 tion of Ireland from England. 
 
 But Mr. Smith was a Conservative, and a member of the 
 late Lord Beaconsfield's Cabinet ! Let us then turn to the 
 letter, in the same number of the Times, of an extreme 
 Radical, the Hon. Auberon Herbert. Writing of the Irish, 
 he said : " The Irish people have learnt to see the figure of 
 " the Prime Minister ever advancing with fresh gifts in his 
 " hands, while a contented Ireland recedes into the distance 
 " before him. For each fresh bid that he makes, Ireland 
 " raises her price. Compensation for eviction is succeeded
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 599 
 
 " by a tribunal of rents ; tribunal of rents, by payment of 
 " arrears ; eviction of the larger farmers, prairie rents, pro- 
 " tection of Irish trade will all in due time tread on the 
 " heels of their predecessors. BEHIND BOTH MR. GLAD- 
 
 " STONE AND MR. PARNELL ARE FORCES WHICH, HAVING 
 " ONCE BEEN ACCEPTED AS MASTERS, ARE NOW EXACTING 
 "FULL SERVICE FROM THEIR SLAVES/' 
 
 The St. James's Gazette of June 2 published an extract 
 from a monthly Review by the London Jesuits, of which 
 the Rev. Albany Christie, S. J., was the Editor. The aim 
 of the publication was " to implant right principles in the 
 " minds of the youth of this country, and to instil into them 
 "political views and aspirations," in accordance with the 
 Jesuit idea of the Roman Church's teaching. The name 
 of the Review is Catholic Progress. The extract was as 
 follows : 
 
 " The woes of Ireland are all due to one simple cause the 
 " existence of Protestantism in Ireland. The remedy could 
 " only be found in the removal of that which caused the 
 " evil which still continues. Why were the Irish not con- 
 " tent ? Because being Irish and Catholic they are governed 
 " by a public opinion which is English and Protestant. Unless 
 " Ireland is governed as a Catholic nation, and full scope 
 "given to the development of the Catholic Church in Ireland 
 " by appropriating to the Catholic religion the funds given to 
 " religion, a recurrence of such events as are now taking place 
 " cannot be prevented. Would that every Protestant house 
 "were swept from the land; then would Ireland recover 
 " herself, and outrages would be unknown ; for there would 
 " be no misbelievers with her champions." 
 
 The principles of Home Rule were out-Home-Ruled in 
 that extract. Not only was Ireland to become an entirely 
 separate and independent Roman Catholic nation ; but 
 it was to be kept isolated, so as to remain uncontaminated 
 by every influence of the " tree of noxious growth "- 
 English public opinion ! The means proposed for this end 
 also went beyond those hitherto employed by Tyrconnel
 
 6oo RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 and Mr. Gladstone. Not only were the Protestant land- 
 lords to be driven out of the country, but " every Protestant 
 "house was to be swept from the land !" 
 
 It was a curious coincidence that, at this very same time, 1 
 the news reached England that two vacant High Court 
 Judgeships, and two posts of Secretary to Indian Govern- 
 ments were all four filled by the appointment of Roman 
 Catholics. Moreover, a vacancy on the Bench in England 
 was filled by a Roman Catholic (Mr. Day) ; and another 
 vacancy on the Bench by another Roman Catholic (Mathew). 
 
 The following announcement also appeared in the World 
 of June 7, 1882 : "The new Bishop of Newcastle is not 
 " only a first cousin of Father Bertrand Wilberforce, a 
 " Catholic priest in the town where he will in future reside, 
 " but he is also the nephew of Cardinal Manning, who is 
 "one of at least four uncles of the new bishop who have 
 " gone over to Rome, whither also his eldest sister and his 
 " brother-in-law have gone." 
 
 On June 6, 1882, Davitt made a speech in Liverpool, 
 in favour of " the Nationalisation of the land." To 
 nationalise Irish land, meant, not its transference to the 
 whole of the Irish nation, but to the present occupiers ; it 
 meant, not its administration to the best commercial ad- 
 vantage, for the benefit of the whole of that nation, but its 
 mismanagement by a few farmers. Such commercial ad- 
 vantage would, on the contrary, render wholesale clearances 
 of tenants absolutely necessary ; and a consolidation of 
 small holdings into large farms ; and, in many places, a 
 substitution of pasture for ploughing and spade digging. 
 The holders of small patches of land can never support 
 themselves and their families. It is out of the bounds of 
 possibility. In Ireland, there are far too many farmers or 
 tenants to farm profitably. That is a physical fact, which 
 theory and sentiment cannot affect. Even if the small 
 holder were to pay no rent at all, he would not be able to 
 live on his little patch in bad years ; and if he felt he had 
 1 Vanity Fair, June 3, 1882.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 601 , 
 
 no rent to pay, he would only ape the fine gentleman, and 
 not work, and would thus come to ruin all the sooner. An 
 English labourer may have his allotment ; but then he is 
 a labourer, and lives by his labour. The allotment is 
 merely a help, a relaxation, and a luxury. The Irishman 
 always desires to be a landlord, and not a labourer. 
 There is the difference. Emigration to a country where 
 land is cheap, because population is scarce, is the only 
 true remedy for Irish distress. Yet that was the very thing 
 against which the Roman Catholic prelates and the 
 English Government had set themselves. Why ? Because 
 the benefit of the Irishman is secondary to the aim of 
 making Ireland a Romanist State. The common ground 
 of Mr. Davitt and the English Government was, that the 
 Protestant landlord must be got out of Ireland, by 
 substituting the State for the landlord ; and that the land 
 was then to be handed over to the present Romanist 
 tenants, the State accepting those tenants as its debtors 
 for instalments of the purchase money. The State, backed 
 up by the English taxpayer, was to accept thousands of 
 dishonest defaulters as its debtors, in hopes that they would 
 not, a second time, try the successful trick of wiping out 
 debts by means of bloodshed and revolution ! 
 
 On the 5th of June, a debate took place, in the House 
 of Lords, on the treaty of Kilmainham, and Mr. Glad- 
 stone's release of Parnell, Davitt and Co. Some passages 
 in it are too important to be passed by. It was opened 
 by the Marquis of Waterford. Lord Cowper, the late 
 Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, spoke, and said : 
 
 " My lords, I wish to say a few words. I think, perhaps, 
 " it will be more convenient if I do so before the noble 
 " Earl rises from the front bench. I was still Lord Lieu- 
 " tenant when these men were released ; but I wish to 
 " explain that my resignation had been accepted some 
 " days before; and from the time that my resignation was 
 " accepted, I considered myself to be virtually no longer 
 " filling the position of Lord Lieutenant, because / knew
 
 6o2 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " no more of all this than any member of your lordship? 
 " House. I wish to explain that before I signed the release 
 " of these three members of Parliament, I sent a telegram 
 " begging that it might be left to my successor, and I only 
 " signed the release on the distinct understanding that it 
 "was a matter of form, and that I did not commit myself 
 " to its policy. I feel, therefore, that I am as much entitled 
 " to express an opinion on these facts as any one of your 
 " lordships. / confess that when I received the telegram, 
 " it took me so completely by surprise that I could hardly 
 " believe it, and I must say that I thougJit it a most grave 
 "step. Such was not only my opinion, but was the opinion 
 " of everybody ; and I saw a great many people whom I 
 "came across and I wish distinctly to say that I am not 
 "alluding to any of the permanent officials, but all the 
 " professional men I met military and naval officers, 
 " landlords, agents, the clergy of all denominations every- 
 " body, I believe, was astonished at this sudden step. It was 
 "its suddenness which constituted its chief evil ; and I am 
 " bound to say that I think the anticipation which we all 
 "felt of the evils which would follow has been accom- 
 " plished. I do not refer to the tragedy in Phcenix Park. 
 " We know as yet too little about that deplorable occur- 
 " rence to say from what motives it arose ; but / refer to 
 " the effects produced locally in every part of Ireland which 
 " had not previously been at all disturbed. It is notorious, 
 " and was made so by every bonfire which was lighted on 
 " that occasion, both publicly and privately, by what ap- 
 " peared in the press, and from all channels of communica- 
 " tion, that it was looked upon as a complete surrender ; that 
 "its effect was most disastrous, and will be to stimulate 
 " disaffection and to make the restoration of law and order 
 " more difficult than it was before" 
 
 The Marquis of Salisbury took part in the debate, and 
 said : " The peculiarity of the action of Her Majesty s Govern- 
 " ment has been througJiout, that they have so contrived their 
 " conciliatory measures that, whatever their own motives in
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 603 
 
 " their own minds may have been, they have done their very 
 " utmost, by the time and the mariner of applying tJwse con- 
 " dilatory measures, to enforce and strengthen the belief that 
 " they have been extorted from them by apprehension, and are 
 " used by them as a means of buying off outrage and crime, 
 " In no transaction in the course of their government, has 
 " this fatal mistake been so strongly manifested as in this 
 " unlucky treaty of Kilmainham. . . . The measures of 
 " the last two years have so deeply impressed on the minds of 
 " ally whether they are loyal to England or the reverse, whether 
 " they approve the policy of the Government or the reverse, 
 " that each successive step of concession has been extorted by 
 " a constantly rising demand of agitation and of outrage, 
 " that for years and generations the impression will remain. 
 " It will be a shadow that will fall, not only on the path of 
 " this Government, but on the path of many future Govern- 
 " ments that will succeed it. The treaty of Kilmainham 
 " not only of itself, but as the culminating point and the 
 " typical incident of the system on which the Government 
 " have proceeded in their legislation towards Ireland will 
 " long be remembered as the cause of constantly increasing 
 " evils in Ireland, and as threatening with serious danger the 
 " connection which is of vital importance to both countries'.' 
 
 No. LXXXI. 
 
 WAS it greed and love of money which afflicted the 
 Dominican " Fathers," or was it complicity with Parnell, 
 Davitt, and the land agitation ? Their conduct, at all 
 events, was such as to encourage the agitation ; their 
 example was unchristian, in endeavouring to rob a poor 
 widow ; and example, we know, is contagious. On the 8th 
 of June, at the Tullamore Quarter Sessions, "the Rev. 
 " Aloysius Ennis, head of the Dominican confraternity, at 
 " Lehinch, near Clara, was sued by Mrs. Clibborn for two 
 " and a half years' rent of land held from her at the annual 
 "rent of 12 2s. 6d. There was practically no defence to
 
 604 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 11 the action. The chairman, in giving judgment for the 
 " plaintiff, with costs, said that he did not deny the legal 
 " right of the defendant to adopt the course pursued, but 
 " commented severely on his conduct, inasmuch as, although 
 " he was the representative of a religious community, he 
 " availed himself of every way of defeating the just claim of 
 " the landlord" 
 
 The Times of June 12 contained a manifesto or pastoral 
 letter of the Bishops of Ireland, who met under the presi- 
 dency of Cardinal McCabe, in Dublin. The manifesto 
 bears marks of a struggle. It is evidently a compromise 
 between light and darkness ; it is an attempt to serve both 
 God and mammon. Therefore it was that the trumpet 
 gave " an uncertain sound," so that no one would prepare 
 for battle, and for resistance to the principles which over- 
 whelmed conscience and mind in Ireland. It said with 
 authority of a Synod: " It is true that on religious as well 
 "as political grounds it is the indisputable right of all IrisJi- 
 " men to live on and by their own fertile soil, and be free to 
 " employ tJie resources of their country for their oivn profit. 
 " It is, moreover, the right, and often the duty, of those who 
 " suffer oppression, either from individuals or from the 
 " State, to seek redress by every lawful means, and to help 
 " in obtaining such redress is a noble work of justice and 
 " charity. On those grounds it is that the object of our 
 " national movement has had the approval and blessing, not 
 " only of your priests and bishops, but of the sovereign Pon- 
 " tiff himself, and has been applauded, in our own and in 
 " foreign countries, by all men of just and generous minds, 
 "without distinction of race or creed. ... In this 
 " peaceable and just movement of yours, the clergy shall 
 " be with you to guide and, if necessary, to restrain you ; 
 " but you must not expect them to do what in conscience 
 " they condemn. They cannot be the sowers of dissension 
 " and hatred among their flocks ; they cannot under any pre- 
 " text tolerate, much less countenance, lawlessness and disorder. 
 " They will work manfully with and for you, but in the light
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 605 
 
 " of day, and with lawful arms, and for just and laudable 
 " objects. . . . Before concluding, we feel it our duty, 
 " without in any sense meaning to excuse the crimes and 
 " offences we have condemned, that in our belief (sic) they 
 " would never have occurred had not the people been 
 " driven to despair by evictions and the prospect of evictions 
 " for the non-payment of exorbitant rents ; and furthermore 
 " that the continuance of such evictions, justly designated by 
 " the Prime Minister of England as sentences of death, must 
 " be a fatal permanent provocative to crime ; and that it is 
 " the duty of all friends of social order, and especially of 
 " the Government, to put an end to them as speedily as 
 " possible and at any cost." This manifesto was signed by 
 all the Roman Catholic bishops. 
 
 The manner in which the bishops' manifesto was re- 
 garded in Ireland was telegraphed to the Times on June 12, 
 as follows : " Their reference to ' unjust evictions ' as the 
 " cause of the murders must be understood as offering the 
 " utmost palliation conscience would permit in the face of such 
 " awful facts as the murders in the Phoenix Park, and the 
 " murders of other persons who never evicted a tenant. . . . 
 " Many of their priests, not to say the bishops themselves, 
 "have been drawn into the full current of the 'national 
 " ' movement' The majority of the people will be likely to read 
 " the pastoral as the programme of a new advance in the 
 " national movement, to which a fresh impetus will be given 
 " by the fact that the Church blesses the work upon the con- 
 dition that it is to be kept free from crime. . . . But as 
 " the formal adhesion of tlie Church to the ' national move- 
 " ' ment,' the acceptance of tJie concessions made to it as only 
 l considerable instalments of 'justice', and the recognition of a 
 "right to claim the 'full measure of justice* in the popular 
 "sense, its effect will be rather to justify than to allay dis- 
 " content and irritation, and to postpone indefinitely the 
 ' period of rest and peace which is so urgently Deeded for 
 "the moral and material welfare of the country." 
 
 The Pope's organ, the Journal de Rome, of June 18, in an
 
 606 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 article headed "Le Manifeste de Dublin," deliberately 
 affirmed that : " It has been plainly seen that it is not so 
 " much the aspirations of the Irish (for repeal of the Union), 
 "as the traditional policy of England, which has created 
 "the grave difficulties against which the Ministry of Mr. 
 " Gladstone, in spite of its good intentions, has had fruit- 
 " lessly to struggle. It is just a hundred years since an 
 " independent Parliament was permitted in Ireland." The 
 article was altogether apologetic. It had evidently been 
 written to palliate the Roman Catholic bishops of Ireland 
 for their half-heartedness in denouncing crime, for the 
 excuses they offered for the crimes which had been com- 
 mitted, and for their unworthy endeavour to serve both 
 God and mammon. The Papal organ apologised for the 
 bishops, saying that they had to write what was false, 
 and advance the principles of Communism, because that 
 the revolutionary party, forsooth, had played the bishops 
 false by spreading a rumour that the bishops had, in a 
 body, been bribed and bought over to the interests of the 
 English Government 1 That was the marvellous statement 
 of the Papal organ ; and therefore, it said, the trumpeters 
 were compelled to give an uncertain sound. That was the 
 Papal justification for the Romish bishops ! 
 
 On the i Qth of June the Times contained a statement 
 that the Government of Mr. D'Israeli had supplied 200,000 
 rifles, from the Woolwich Arsenal, to the disaffected Irish ; 
 and that, the next year, a further sale was about to be 
 made, when Mr. James Lovvther, who was then Irish Secre- 
 tary, protested so energetically against it, that the sale 
 did not take place. Poor Mr. Lowther ! your honest 
 patriotism has been rewarded according to the invariable 
 rule ! You have not received a place in the next Conser- 
 vative Government. 
 
 The same evening, Lord Eustace Cecil, who was the 
 Controller of the Ordnance in Mr. D'Israeli's Government, 
 said, in the House of Commons, that on account of a 
 leading article in the Times of that day, reflecting on the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 607 
 
 conduct of the department over which he had the honour 
 to preside for some years, and containing statements of a 
 misleading character, he begged to ask the Secretary of 
 State for War some questions, of which he had given him 
 private notice. The statement in the Times was : " When 
 " we remember that in 1 879 some 200,000 rifles were sold by 
 " the War Office, and, in spite of the protest of the tJien Irish 
 " Secretary, were allowed to find tJieir way into Ireland, 
 " and that these very weapons are now in tfie hands of tJie 
 " miscreant bodies with which Ireland swarms, we may well 
 " doubt whether one landlord the less will be shot, or one 
 " official the less be struck down, in consequence of Satur- 
 " day's seizure." He wished to ask the right hon. gentle- 
 man, whether any arms at all were sold in 1879 ; secondly, 
 whether any sale of arms took place since the protest of 
 the Irish Government was received at the War Office in 
 July, 1879; and thirdly, with reference to the seizure of 
 Saturday, whether he could state if the arms seized at 
 Clerkenwell were manufactured by or for the Government. 
 
 Mr. Childers : " In reply to the noble lord, I have to 
 " state that no arms were sold by the War Office in 1879, 
 " and that no arms have been sold since the objection made by 
 " the Irish Government in that year. The arms seized at 
 " Clerkenwell are in course of examination to-day, but I 
 "have just heard that none of them were manufactured by 
 " or for the Government." 
 
 Mr. Mitchell Henry wished to ask the Secretary of State 
 for War why the Irish Government remonstrated in July, 
 1879, respecting the sale of arms if no arms had been sold, 
 and whether it was not the fact that an unadvised large 
 sale of arms took place in 1878, under the auspices of the 
 late Government. 
 
 Mr. Lowther said perhaps he might be allowed to say 
 at once that he did make a remonstrance against the sale, 
 by an individual in Sheffield, of some arms which bore the 
 Government mark, and had previously been in tlte possession 
 of tJie military authorities.
 
 6o8 
 
 Sir R. Cross asked the Home Secretary whether he could 
 give any further information about the seizure of arms, and 
 as there was considerable anxiety among the public at the 
 fact that only one person had been apprehended, whether 
 he would explain how it came to pass that the police were 
 not ready to apprehend other persons concerned. 
 
 Sir W. Harcourt said that the accounts in the newspapers 
 as to that matter were substantially correct. A large number 
 of arms and a great quantity of ammunition and revolvers 
 had been seized by the police. He did not think it 
 desirable to make any further statement 
 
 We must remark, in the first place, that the charge 
 against Walsh was for " feloniously receiving and fraudu- 
 " lently dealing with certain rifles, bayonets, and other fire- 
 " arms, believed to be the property of Her Majesty's Gov- 
 " ernment," and it was sworn that between 300 and 400 of 
 the rifles discovered in Clerkenwell (the rest not having 
 been examined) bore the " Tower mark." Mr. Childers, 
 however, brought himself to say that " he had just heard " 
 that none of them were manufactured by or for the Gov- 
 ernment ! A friendly Deus ex machind must have been 
 persuaded to say so. Secondly, it must be remembered 
 that both question and answer were framed so as to lead 
 the inquirer away from the truth ; they were quibbles. 
 The large sale of arms took place in 1878; and Mr. 
 Lowther protested against another sale taking place in 
 1879. Of course the Times, next day, alluded to the 
 subject : 
 
 " Lord Eustace Cecil endeavoured yesterday to obtain 
 " from the Secretary for War an official contradiction of the 
 "statement published in these columns, that in 1879 some 
 " 200,000 rifles were sold by the War Office, and that the 
 " fact excited the alarm of the Irish Government. It ap- 
 " pears, indeed, that no rifles were sold in 1879, when Mi\ 
 " Lowther protested against their distribution tJiroitgli a 
 "private firm at an extraordinarily low rate. But Mr. 
 " Childers was not able to deny that the sale took place in
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 609 
 
 " 1878, when it attracted, as a correspondent assures us, 
 " the criticism of the gunmaking trade, on the ground of 
 " unfair competition at ridiculously low prices. In the 
 " following year, when the weapons had passed into private 
 " hands at the rate, in some cases, of three-and-sixpence 
 " apiece it proved too late to recall them." 
 
 On the 22nd, the Times correspondent of Dublin ex- 
 plained the transaction : 
 
 " No little astonishment has been excited by the attempt 
 " to discredit the statement made in the Times as to the 
 " sale of arms by the War Office, during the late Adminis- 
 " tration, against the remonstrance of the then Chief Secre- 
 " tary for Ireland. The sale, reported at the time, caused 
 " a cry of alarm to be raised in the North of Ireland, where 
 " it was instinctively felt that the weapons would be soon 
 " used for criminal and treasonable purposes. The rifles 
 " Sniders of the best make were tied in bundles like 
 " walking-sticks, and sold, not only in the shops, but in the 
 " open streets, and hundreds of them were bought up at 
 " from 6s. to Js. apiece. They were conveyed in wagon- 
 " loads, without any secrecy, into Kerry and other counties 
 "in the South and West, where they are borne by the 
 " night patrols of ' Captain Moonlight,' and prove, un- 
 " happily, a very effective weapon. The disaffected classes 
 "in Ireland bought them up with avidity." 
 
 That evening, in the House of Commons, " Mr. Findlater 
 "asked the Secretary of State for War whether between 
 " 100,000 and 200,000 Government rifles were sold by the 
 " War Department in the year 1878, and shipped to Ireland 
 "and sold in the course of the year 1879." 
 
 Mr. Childers : "Yes, sir; between 100,000 and 200,000 
 " muzzle-loading rifles were sold by the War Department 
 "in 1878. . . . There was some correspondence be- 
 "tween my predecessor and the late Irish Government on 
 "this subject after the sale, but as // resulted in nothing' I 
 " do not think that any public advantage would be gained 
 " by describing what passed." 
 
 R R
 
 6 io RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Before passing on to the Arrears Bill, let us pause to 
 hear Cardinal McCabe. Let us next listen to the echoes 
 from Rome, concerning one who supported the leader of 
 the Liberal party, while faintly and feebly practising the 
 tactics of opposition, and uttering, with the object of 
 securing the fealty of his followers, some empty sounding 
 epithets of censure, and grandly rolling phrases of warfare. 
 Cardinal McCabe said, in a Pastoral read in all the churches 
 on the day of St. Peter and St. Paul (June 29, 1882) : "An 
 " unnatural warfare rages through the land, and crimes that 
 " call loudly to heaven for punishment stain the once holy 
 " soil of Ireland. No word of defence can be offered for tlie 
 " deeds of oppression which in some districts are driving our 
 "poor unhappy people to desperation and ruin. But, on the 
 " other hand, no words of reprobation are strong enough to 
 " denounce the horrid deeds of vengeance which are making 
 " our country a byword amongst civilized nations. By the 
 "one class of wrong-doers as well as by the other, nought 
 "but terrible judgments from Eternal Justice can be expected" 
 On the same day, the Pope's organ, the Journal de Rome, 
 wrote : " It would not be quite just to censure the whole 
 " Conservative party for the unreasonable and blind oppo- 
 " sition which some of its members incessantly offer to the 
 " Government, and that for the sole reason that its measures 
 " issue from the Liberal camp. The attitude of Sir Stafford 
 " Northcote has never for one single moment ceased to be 
 " correct ever since the tragical end of Lord F. Cavendish 
 " sufficed to prove to the Conservative leader the necessity 
 "of uniting all the forces of the nation to overcome its 
 "internal evils. . . . To all the charges of the Con- 
 " servatives, Mr. Gladstone and Lord Granville can reply 
 " invariably : ' You complain of the anarchy in Ireland ; but 
 " ' it is you, Conservative landlords, who have driven the 
 " ' Irish farmers to despair/ " etc. 
 
 The organ of His Holiness then proceeded to spread the 
 opinion that those who raise their voices against the ex- 
 ternal and internal policy of Mr. Gladstone (as Lord Salis-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 611 
 
 bury had done), were " irresponsible politicians, who burned 
 "rather with the desire to signalize themselves in some 
 " way or another, than to do that which is required by the 
 "interests of their country." So eager was the Pope to 
 support Mr. Gladstone, while exonerating the murderers in 
 Ireland, and laying all the blame on the landlords, who 
 were supposed to have driven a righteous people to 
 despair. 
 
 On the 5th of July, '82, between the Committee and the 
 Report on the Crimes Prevention Bill, Mr. Gladstone moved 
 the Committee on the Arrears Bill. Lord Clanricarde, a 
 Liberal peer, had just addressed a communication to the 
 Times, enclosing a letter from his agent, Mr. Blake, who, 
 with his wife and coachman, had been lately murdered on 
 their way to mass. Mr. Blake had written : " The Arrears 
 " Bill has completely paralysed the payment of rents ; and its 
 " introduction at a time when some slight symptom of a dispo- 
 " sition to honesty was beginning to manifest itself among the 
 "tenantry ivas most unfortunate. Tenants of all classes now 
 "evince a determination not to pay until they see the 
 " upshot of this measure before Parliament." 
 
 A short extract from the Times * shows the deliberate 
 judgment of the leading journal, as to the cause of the 
 crisis : " It was frankly admitted by the Prime Minister, 
 " when the Arrears Bill was originally introduced, that 
 " the measure could not be defended on ordinary prin- 
 " ciples. The one argument for it was that a crisis had 
 "arisen in Ireland which needed extraordinary and ex- 
 " ceptional remedies. It may be contended that upon the 
 "policy of the Government is really chargeable the responsi- 
 "bility for that crisis ; but, at any rate, it exists, and it is 
 " necessary to deal with it in some way or other. . . . 
 " One consequence is that the payment of rent is now to a 
 " great extent suspended." That is to say: the Arrears Bill 
 was indefensible, except on the ground that it was necessary 
 to allay the critical agitation in Ireland ; and further, that 
 
 1 July 6.
 
 6i2 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 critical agitation had been created by the direct action of 
 the Government, in order to pass measures resulting in the 
 destruction of the Irish Protestant landlords. 
 
 In moving the Committee on the Arrears of Rent Bill, 
 Mr. Gladstone admitted the same : "In a letter of Lord 
 " Clanricarde, he quotes, on the authority of a gentleman 
 "whose career was closed by so deplorable an incident 
 " and so wicked a crime, a declaration of that gentleman 
 " of great weight. That declaration is that ' the Arrears 
 " ' Bill has completely paralysed the payment of rents.' I 
 " have no doubt that a Bill of this kind must have a tendency 
 " to check the payment of rents" 
 
 The next day, Mr. Gladstone (July 6) admitted, in reply 
 to Mr. Gibson, that since the ist of May, nearly all the 
 appeals had been heard by two, instead of the three 
 Commissioners as provided by the Act. Since the only 
 decision favourable to the landlords, in the case of Adams 
 v. Dunseath, in April (on the interpretation of " Healy's 
 " clause "), Mr. Gladstone had transferred the independent 
 Commissioner, Mr. Vernon, from the bench of the Commis- 
 sion, to an office in Dublin. The other two Commissioners 
 were considered more favourable to the Irish Nationalist 
 views than Mr. Vernon. Did not that proceeding reveal 
 Mr. Gladstone's animus and intentions in regard to the 
 Irish landlords? 
 
 No. LXXXII. 
 
 A FOOLISH report appeared in the Irish papers, that the 
 Government were about to import bloodhounds from the 
 Slave States of America, in order to aid the police in 
 tracking out murderers in Ireland. In an article on the 
 murders lately perpetrated in that country, and especially 
 that murder which happened so opportunely for Mr. Glad- 
 stone's legislative purposes, the St. James's Gazette of 
 July 7 contained the following remarkable paragraph :
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 613 
 
 " You may safely contradict the statement that the Govern- 
 "ment will encourage, or, if they can help it, allow, the 
 "despatch of sleuth-hounds to Ireland. Tiie instinct of 
 " those dogs is too keen, and Ministers know too well how to 
 " take care of themselves. If a brace of these beasts were laid 
 "on the trail, tJiey would be soon found resolutely posted in a 
 "street not far from Whitehall, with their eyes intently fixed 
 "on a well-known door." 
 
 It appeared, from this paragraph, that a new Obadiah 
 had hidden prophets by fifties in a cave. When the day 
 of awakening shall arrive, there will be more than one of 
 them to point out the guilty. 
 
 The afternoon of July 7 was devoted to the Report of the 
 Prevention of Crime Bill. During the Committee on the 
 Bill, Mr. Gladstone, on June 20, without consultation with 
 his colleagues, had promised the Irish members to make a 
 relaxation in the Bill, a concession which would have 
 made the Act a dead letter ; just as similar concessions 
 had rendered previous Coercion Bills nugatory. A notice 
 of amendment had been given, in Committee, by one of 
 the Irish members, Mr. Richard Power. It was this in- 
 sidious amendment which Mr. Gladstone had promised to 
 carry on the Report. The object of the amendment was, 
 to weaken the hands of the Executive, and do away with 
 the right of search, at the only time when it could be of 
 the slightest avail. To be effective, the police should be 
 able to make a search, in suspicious quarters, unexpectedly, 
 suddenly, and at any time. To lay a trap in the sight of 
 a bird is a fatuity. If a murder has been committed at 
 night, and the murderers have been tracked to some house 
 on a lonely bog or moor, may the police not enter the 
 house because it is dark, to confront the murderers who 
 are red-handed from the deed of darkness, and to see the 
 stains on their clothes, and the reeking weapons in their 
 possession ? Or if at night men have been seen to ap- 
 proach a lonely house, stealthily, and one by one, may the 
 police not enter the house to find the conclave sitting to
 
 6i4 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 condemn another victim, and plotting his destruction ? Is 
 the house to be held sacred as long as the sun is down 
 sacred, although it is full of murderers and conspirators ? 
 If, during the long winter months, the conspirators are to 
 enjoy a right of sanctuary, then a domiciliary visit could 
 not be a surprise. It is certainly of no avail unless it is 
 unexpected. To see the approach of constables gives 
 time for escape, or for the concealment of documents, and 
 makes the visit of the police a futility. At a time when 
 Mr. Gladstone knew of the wholesale distribution of arms 
 among the disaffected in Ireland, Mr. Gladstone, under the 
 plea of fulfilling an apparently rash promise, and by adroitly 
 inserting an insidious amendment at the last moment, made 
 the Coercion Bill a dead letter. What are we to think of 
 Mr. Gladstone's leadership ? Or of his patriotism ? 
 
 The House learned from Mr. Bright, that the Committee 
 of the Cabinet, which settled the original draft of the Pre- 
 vention of Crime Bill, had decided against a power to 
 search by night. When the Bill was considered by the 
 whole Cabinet, the power to search by night was promptly 
 inserted ; and the Home Secretary, when moving for leave 
 to introduce the Bill, dwelt strongly on the absolute im- 
 portance of the provision. On the nth of May Sir William 
 Harcourt described it as " most necessary." It was " a 
 " power to search for the secret apparatus of murder, for 
 "the daggers, for the documents, for the threatening letters, 
 "for the crape masks which are hidden and which the 
 " police cannot reach ; and unless the police have power 
 " to enter houses and look for them, the persons who make 
 " use of these apparatus possess practical impunity." The 
 clause, the Home Secretary added, was taken from the 
 Peace Preservation Act of 1870 : " the search (he said) will 
 " take place by day and by night, and by night it will be 
 " more necessary." That was the clause which Mr. Glad- 
 stone, without consultation with his Cabinet, promised the 
 Irish members, on June 20, that he would discard. Of 
 course, if Earl Spencer did not like such a power, he would
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 615 
 
 have been under no compulsion to use it. Mr. Gladstone 
 should moreover have remembered that the duration of the 
 Bill was for three years ; and that, before the expiration 
 of that period, great and unexpected developments of Irish 
 outrage and crime might render the exercise of such a 
 power a necessity ; and that the advantage of being able 
 to put it in force without delay, and without the irritation 
 which would be caused by the passing of a New Coercion 
 Bill, would be enormous. 
 
 On Friday, July 7, the Government were beaten on the 
 insertion of that stultifying amendment, by a majority of 
 thirteen (207 to 194), many Liberals voting against Mr. 
 Gladstone. 
 
 The Pope's newspaper, the Journal de Rome, on Aug. 
 26, 1882, made a revelation showing how a conspiracy had 
 been frustrated by the act of God. "That which many 
 "centuries of legislative efforts could not obtain for Ire- 
 ' land, Mr. Gladstone was on the point of demanding from 
 " a New Regime, which is inspired not only by his Liberal 
 " principles, but is also conformable to those principles of 
 " self-government which sway all modern States, and to 
 " which England owes the power and greatness of her 
 " institutions. The tentative beginning of such a Regime 
 " would have been worthy of the political career of Mr. 
 " Gladstone ; and many have bitterly lamented that he 
 " should have suddenly abandoned his excellent intentions 
 "and returned to the ancient traditions of repression by 
 " extraordinary laws. Certainly the assassination of Lord 
 "F. Cavendish, immediately on his landing in Ireland, 
 " whither he had brought the pledges that Mr. Gladstone 
 " would carry out a policy of conciliation, which was to be 
 "only a first step towards autonomy, made every heart 
 " shudder with indignation. But was it wise to resort to 
 " reprisals in the heat of that impression ? " etc. That is 
 to say, Lord F. Cavendish was sent to Ireland to prepare 
 to carry a measure of Home Rule ; but his murder de- 
 feated the project
 
 616 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 The blindness of the newspapers and the people of 
 England, was extraordinary. Throughout the agitation, 
 the papers chronicled that the Government had done all 
 in their power to increase the agitation ; and yet neither 
 editors, nor any one else, would see, in the acts of the 
 Government, any evidence of their design ; and that too in 
 spite of Mr. Gladstone's open avowal that he would cut 
 down the three branches of the Upas-tree of Protestant 
 ascendency, and his latter declarations in favour of the 
 autonomy of Ireland as a Romanist State. 
 
 On Oct. 6, it was announced that a new political cam- 
 paign had been determined on, in Galway ; and a two 
 days' Conference was therefore held in Athenry, on the 1 3th 
 and I4th. The movement, or rather agitation, had received 
 the sanction of the bishops and priests ; and the requisition 
 for the Convention had been signed by a very large number 
 of priests, ex-prisoners, and prominent agitators. Dr. 
 McEvilly, the Archbishop of Tuam, stated, in reply to 
 inquiries, that he approved highly of the Convention. The 
 Pope's newspaper, the Journal de Rome, of Oct. 15, con- 
 tained the following official paragraph in reference to it : 
 " As a concession to the general opinion which prevails 
 "among the Roman Catholic priesthood, an important 
 " modification has been introduced, by interpretive letters 
 " of the Irish bishops, in the rescript of the sovereign 
 " Pontiff, by which he interdicted all the priests from par- 
 ticipation in any political movements. All the bishops 
 " of Ireland, with the sole exception of Cardinal Arch- 
 " bishop McCabe, have given permission to the priests of 
 " their diocese to associate themselves with the movement 
 " inaugurated at the Dublin Mansion House for the support 
 " of evicted tenants ; and also with the Labourers League 
 " founded by Mr. Parnell. Many of the dignitaries of the 
 " Roman Catholic Church of Ireland have been elected as 
 " presidents of the various branches of these associations ; 
 " and in this character they will take part in the Conference 
 "which will be held in Dublin, next week."
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 617 
 
 Davitt had announced at Wexford, on October 9, the 
 renewed agitation, "with the unmistakable issue Irish 
 " landlordism, and its total and complete abolition." Davitt 
 had repudiated the Land Act and Arrears Act, as merely 
 miserable instalments of some great debt owing by Eng- 
 land to Ireland ; because those measures had not, in his 
 opinion, fulfilled the only end on which they pretended to 
 be justified. They had, indeed, not pacified Ireland one 
 whit. The agitation was continued as before. The country 
 was to be plunged further into the slough of Socialism and 
 Jesuitism ; and the priests and bishops of Ireland were to 
 be those who were to enter the herd of Irish swine, and 
 urge them down that steep place, into the abyss. Mr. 
 Gladstone would hoodwink the people of England, by 
 saying to them : The half of the Irish party which are 
 moderate, must not be driven into the arms of the ex- 
 tremists, by a refusal to make further concessions to their 
 demands. The Parliament and people of England would 
 surely not wish to see their labours and sacrifices hitherto, 
 go for nothing? Unless you satisfy the Catholic, and 
 national aspirations of the country, all your remedial legis- 
 lation will be lost. Your only chance of keeping down 
 the dangerous agitation in Ireland, is to grant the wishes 
 of the moderate Irish members who desire to keep within 
 the lines of the Constitution ; and so forth. Thus Mr. 
 Gladstone was prepared to urge ; and, " swearing he 
 " could ne'er consent, consented." 
 
 In fact, on Oct. 9, the St. James's Gazette announced a 
 " fresh series of understandings and transactions between 
 " the Irish party and the Government " ; while the Papal 
 newspaper, the Moniteurde Rome, of Oct. 14, wrote in favour 
 of Davitt and Mr. Gladstone, coupling them most curiously 
 together, like Siamese twins. After heaping encomiums on 
 Davitt, as " the chief of the Land League," it said : " We are 
 " the last to ignore the incomparable benefits and generous 
 " initiatives of the eminent man who presides over the 
 " political destinies of England (that is, Davitt). We are
 
 618 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " the last, having rendered homage to his persistent activity, 
 " and to his claims to the gratitude and honours which are 
 " legitimately due to him. Mr. Gladstone also has served 
 " the cause of humanity. . . . Mr. Gladstone has pur- 
 " sued, throughout his whole political existence, the partial 
 " liberation of the Irish people. . . . But in endeavouring 
 " to do this, he had to calm the darkened consciousness of 
 " the Tories, to soothe the terrors of landlordism, menaced 
 " in its interests ; and, when those tenacious prejudices of 
 " landlords were revived by criminal attempts, to render 
 " justice, in a certain measure, to tlie legitimate revenge of 
 " the agrarian party. In spite of the imperfections, and even 
 " lacunae, in his work of economic reorganization in Ireland, 
 " the labours of Mr. Gladstone bear a character, which cannot 
 " be gainsaid, of justice and of force ; and there is in them 
 " a feature of audacity which strikes the imagination. . . . 
 " Yet the initiative of Mr. Gladstone is, so far, but a first 
 " essay. A greater, a more extended work is in store a work 
 " which will crown his laborious and restless life, and the 
 " glory of which will overbear all cavil. For all that, we 
 " firmly believe that all Gladstone's legislative efforts 
 " would have been doomed to futility, had it not been 
 " that the Church of Rome caused his prolific and healthful 
 " influence to affect men's hearts and minds. . . . THE 
 " PAPACY IMPRESSED ITS SEAL ON THAT LEGISLATOR'S 
 " POLITICAL LABOURS." 
 
 No. LXXXIII. 
 
 ON Oct. 17, 1882, the "National Conference" met in 
 Dublin. The objects of the League were presented in five 
 articles : the complete autonomy of Ireland, the trans- 
 ference of the land to peasant proprietors, and so forth. 
 Those articles and the rules had to be accepted en bloc. 
 On the same day, Davitt made a violent speech at Edge-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 619 
 
 worthstown against "landlordism," and in favour of "the 
 " land for the people." 
 
 Now let us turn to the proceedings at the National 
 Convention. It must first be remarked that all the 
 moderate Home Rulers had been silenced and driven 
 away, as having " deserted under the fire of the enemy." 
 All who shrank in the least, from the aims and methods of 
 the Land League, had come under the ban of the Land 
 League, and their refusal to advance was met with a moral 
 
 o * 
 
 boycotting. The wire-pullers of the Conference threw the 
 Land Act and Arrears Act behind them, and went in for 
 the total abolition of the Irish Protestant landlords. One 
 and all contemptuously assailed the Land Act as a paltry 
 piece of Parliamentary huckstering. Their proposal to 
 pay the Irish members of Parliament was also an astute 
 piece of revolutionary mechanism. It was proposed that 
 only the foremost members should be paid 250 a year. 
 This would be an incentive to the younger, or the more 
 moderate, members to increase in violence and rancour. 
 Members were not to be paid by their constituencies, but 
 by the Council of the League. The Irish members would 
 thus become the servants of that secret tribunal. Davitt's 
 scheme for the election of the Council of the League was a 
 similar contrivance. The Irish members of Parliament 
 were not to have ex officio seats on the Council, although 
 they might be candidates for election. The election was 
 to be made, not by the county electors, but by all the poor 
 and ignorant. Thus it would be certain that the eager 
 tools of the Fenian Society would alone get elected. 
 
 The proceedings at the " National Convention " were as 
 follows : Mr. Parnell made the first speech, congratulating 
 the assembly that their meetings had been presided over 
 by Roman Catholic bishops. He moved the adoption of 
 the five articles and the rules of the "Irish National 
 " League." 
 
 The Rev Mr. Cantwell, of Thurles, seconded the motion. 
 He said the Land Act was a complete failure. The great
 
 620 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 remedy for the wants of Ireland was national self-govern- 
 ment, 
 
 Mr. Davitt repeated his declaration that, until the land 
 of Ireland, stolen from the people of Ireland, was restored 
 to them, there could be no final or satisfactory settlement. 
 
 The Rev. Mr. Tormey also pronounced the Land Act a 
 failure. A peasant proprietary should be established in 
 Ireland. 
 
 Mr. Louden, who was received with mingled cheers, 
 hisses, and cries of " Renegade," with difficulty obtained a 
 hearing at the request of the chairman. Even then it was 
 with great reluctance that Mr. Louden was heard, and with 
 constant interruption. At last he was hooted down. He 
 was once a most popular speaker at the Land League 
 meetings, but is now below zero in the estimation of the 
 party. His fall is attributed to his having preserved his 
 liberty. 
 
 Mr. Harrington, an ex-suspect, commenced an attack on 
 Mr. Louden, who, he said, worked in the movement when 
 it was safe, and ran away when it became dangerous. 
 
 The Rev. Harold Rylett moved that each county should 
 elect a representative to the Executive Council, subject to 
 such conditions as may be deemed necessary by the Exe- 
 cutive Council. The rev. gentleman professed himself to be 
 for the will of the people, whether right or wrong. 
 
 And so forth. 
 
 During the meeting it became evident that some of the 
 Irish members were distrusted by the Fenian wire-pullers ; 
 and those members of Parliament knew that they were 
 distrusted. Davitt desired that the supreme Council 
 should be entirely elective ; but he gave way in favour of 
 the proposal which was ultimately carried, namely, that 
 two-thirds of the Council should be elected, and one-third, 
 that is sixteen, should be appointed by the Irish members 
 of Parliament. Those appointments would most likely be 
 made from among their own number. The non-elected 
 members would be absent, in attendance on their parlia-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 621 
 
 mentary duties, for more than six months in the year ; and 
 the Council would then practically be in the hands of 
 Davitt, or the Revolutionists. Moreover, Davitt and his 
 friends would be able, without difficulty, to influence the 
 constituencies against those members of Parliament who 
 should refuse to go far enough to please the Fenian Society. 
 In every way, the game was therefore placed in their 
 hands. 
 
 Mr. Parnell, even, was called a " Conservative," at the 
 Convention. This was an earnest of the deposition and 
 ignominy in store for him ; a fate which he knew could be 
 averted only by zeal in obtaining further " concessions " 
 from the Government. Thus the extreme element would 
 become a lever, in the hands of the moderate element, to 
 make the Government give way to the extreme element ; 
 or at least, to furnish an excuse for Mr. Gladstone in doing 
 those acts which he might call compulsory concessions. 
 
 They were astute intellects who had brought about such 
 a situation. The intrigue had been well planned, and 
 deftly worked. That Mr. Gladstone knew the secret, 
 became apparent from the cue which was given to Mr. 
 Gladstone's organ, The Daily News, on Oct. 18. It said 
 that all the articles which defined the aims of the " Irish 
 " National League," excepting one, must " command a very 
 " large amount of sympathy from Liberal politicians in all 
 " three divisions of the United Kingdom." It added a 
 regret that Ireland should, for another year, engross the 
 attention of the Legislature, because of the " impossibility 
 " of objecting to the greater part of the measures for which 
 " it is now proposed to agitate." 
 
 The revolutionary propaganda seemed to be flourishing 
 in that unhappy country. The Times of Oct. 21 showed, 
 if any one could be found to doubt it, that Mr. Parnell's 
 movement in Ireland was essentially a Roman Catholic 
 movement, and was regarded as such by the people them- 
 selves. Say rather, a Jesuit movement ; for the Jesuits of 
 these days have revived the scheme which was planned by
 
 622 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 the Jesuits in the days of Tyrconnel and James II. It is 
 well known that the Jesuits were expelled from every 
 country of Europe, and even put under the ban of the 
 Pope, and dissolved by Papal bull, on account of their 
 restless intrigues in every country, their nefarious and 
 immoral policy, and their audacious crimes. In 1814, they 
 were reinstated. Then again they sowed the wind in every 
 State ; and the Roman Church, who has nurtured them in 
 her bosom, is about to reap the whirlwind. The first 
 mutterings or the approaching tornado were heard in 
 Rome on Oct. 18, and narrated in the Pope's organ, the 
 Journal de Rome. In its leader, it complained that the 
 Irish Roman Catholic University had " actually ceased to 
 " exist." It had been instituted (it said) by the National 
 Synod of Thurles, in 1850, and was founded by the Apos- 
 tolic letters of March 23, 1852. In May, 1854, it was 
 solemnly inaugurated. No less than ^"280,000 were sub- 
 scribed for its maintenance, during the space of 23 years. 
 A few days previously to this article in the Journal de 
 Rome, all the bishops of Ireland in Synod resolved that the 
 subscriptions from all the Papal sees of Ireland should 
 cease. The Cardinal Archbishop of Dublin, McCabe, 
 alone stood out, and determined to try to carry it on him- 
 self. Gallant McCabe endeavoured to do what he thought 
 right, and therefore stood alone. He was always deserted 
 by all the Romanist Hierarchy. Had then the other 
 Romanist bishops left the Roman Church for the Fenian 
 agitation which they had fomented ? or had that Fenian 
 agitation alienated their flocks, and dried up all their sub- 
 scriptions ? 
 
 The storm continued to approach, in its terrible grandeur, 
 for those who watched the signs of the times, and could see 
 its effects ; it approached from the Hand of the Judge and 
 Ruler of the whole earth. It shook all things ; it shook 
 the Roman Church in Ireland, and blew away, like dust, 
 its dry and selfish religious opinions. Listen to some of 
 the gusts, as they moaned through the corridors of the
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 623 
 
 public journals. But we must distinguish. It was the 
 intention, and part of the Jesuit plot, to dry up the re- 
 sources of the Protestant Church, which Gladstone had 
 disestablished. It was the wrath of God, which burned 
 up the pabulum of the Romanist Church. The Times of 
 Oct. 20 said : " The Disestablished Protestant Church, as a 
 " working system, has been gravely affected already, and 
 " more seriously threatened in the future, by the pecuniary 
 " losses inflicted on the Irish landlords, and the disrup- 
 " tion of private and public ties in many parts of the 
 " country. . . . During the past three years the landlords, 
 " and all those whose interests were bound up with them, 
 " have been driven into desperate straits, and tJte operation 
 " of the Land Act must apparently effect a large permanent 
 " reduction in their incomes. . . . The Land Act, whatever 
 " else it may have done or failed to do, has effectually severed 
 " the sentimental connection between the landlord, reduced to 
 " the position of a rent-charger, and the soil. 
 
 " In a very different manner, but not less significantly, 
 " has the influence of the Roman Catholic Church been affected 
 " by the events of the past three years. The Church of Rome, 
 " not merely as an aggressive, but even as a defensive 
 " power, is becoming daily weakened by the agrarian move- 
 " ment. . . . The fact remains indisputable. The power for 
 " good and for evil of the Roman Catholic Church and priest- 
 " hood over the Irish masses has been broken, and it is scarcely 
 " possible to conceive how the moral miracle of its restor- 
 " ation can be hoped for by rational men. Fifty years, 
 " thirty years, twenty years, even ten years ago, those who 
 " knew Ireland best would have pronounced the destruction 
 " of the power of the priesthood an impossibility. Nor, in 
 " all probability, would it have been destroyed if those who 
 " wielded it had been faithful to their trust. Unfortunately, 
 " in the effort to retain their influence undiminished, and to 
 " put pressure upon the Imperial Government, the heads of tJte 
 " Roman Catholic Church in Ireland allowed their subordinates 
 " to temporize and play with the agrarian movement. . . .
 
 624 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Those prelates and clergymen who dared to withstand, 
 " even partially, the popular demands were insulted and 
 " threatened. The highest ecclesiastical rank, the most 
 " faithful services to the people, did not secure their names 
 " against contumely. . . . Such is the present position 
 " of the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland, after three 
 " years of agitation which a resolute policy might have 
 " curbed in the beginning. ... It would be rash to 
 " forecast the development of this change, but those who 
 " might have prevented it may now reflect with impotent 
 " regret on the folly of playing with the flames of revolu- 
 " tionary passion." 
 
 But very few days after this, a telegram from Rome 
 informed us, on very good authority, that Mr. Parnell's 
 speeches and programme, and the speeches of the promi- 
 nent Land Leaguers, had been carefully studied at the 
 Vatican, and that the Pope had become frightened at the 
 storm ; he was in terror, and perplexed at the strong 
 atheistical and communistical tendency of the movement ; 
 and was anxious, by a strenuous mandate, to recall the 
 bishops and priests from it. At the same time, there 
 arrived a letter from a Roman Catholic gentleman in 
 Dublin, who corroborated the position of the Roman 
 University in Ireland. He said : " The (Roman) Catholic 
 " University is now merged in the Royal University, and 
 " the Catholic professors have got fellowships in it. As a 
 " matter of fact, save as to the medical school, it has been 
 " closed for years. The professors exceeded the number of 
 " students." 
 
 The statement regarding the Roman Catholic University 
 was more than borne out by the Romanist Tablet (of the 
 2 ist and 28th). It admitted that the university had col- 
 lapsed, because twenty-eight Roman Catholic bishops of 
 Ireland had withdrawn their subscriptions ; and the reason 
 assigned for their act was, that the funds they had been 
 accustomed to receive from their flocks had fallen very 
 short, and they had not the money to give.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 625 
 
 No. LXXXIV. 
 
 Ox the 5th of November, 1882, a very curious event per- 
 plexed the inquiring. An Encyclical letter of Pope 
 Leo XIII., addressed to " The Patriarchs, Primates, Arch- 
 bishops and Bishops of the Catholic world in grace and 
 " communion with the Apostolic See" was published in the 
 Times, and read in all the Roman Catholic churches ; and 
 yet the Pope's organs, which professed to publish all public 
 documents that emanated from the Curia at Rome such 
 as the Journal de Rome and the Moniteur de Rome did 
 not make the slightest allusion to it. In this document 
 the Pope began by heaping encomiums on the twelfth 
 century which was indeed the highest acme" of the 
 Papacy, and was distinguished by the lowest depth and 
 degradation of morals: or, as the Pope expressed it, "licen- 
 tiousness had greatly impaired popular morality." The 
 Pope then laid down this infallible proposition in morals : 
 " the perfection of Christian virtue lies in that disposition of 
 " the soul which dares all that is arduous and difficult? 
 Some might say that virtue, being enduring, is a quality ; 
 while a disposition is passing. Others might call that 
 quality courage ; others again, observing that all things 
 difficult, without distinction, are to be dared or discarded, 
 would term it foolhardiness or rashness. The philosopher, 
 on the other hand, would object to virtue being defined as 
 a disposition, instead of a habit of the soul. But the Pope 
 was speaking, ex cathedrd, on morals, to the whole Roman 
 Catholic Church, and therefore his dictum was infallible! 
 The Irish patriots were no doubt encouraged and stimu- 
 lated by the Pope's Tel-el-Kebir kind of religion. 
 
 The Pope then sketched the life of St. Francis of Assist, 
 and ended by announcing the remedy for all the social evils 
 of the world ; namely, the institution and spread, among 
 the laity, of the Third Order of St. Francis, which had been 
 suppressed and strictly forbidden by the Canon Law, which 
 
 S S
 
 626 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 the Pope had sworn to observe ! That document was 
 therefore suppressed by all the Papal newspapers. 
 
 On the 22nd of November, the British Government was 
 warned by the Journal de Rome, that "never will the 
 " English Government succeed in pacifying Ireland, except 
 " by the assistance of the Catholic Church." Three days 
 after, the influence of the two Papal utterances was seen in 
 the daring murder of Detective Cox, in one of the main 
 thoroughfares of Dublin, and in broad daylight. That was 
 the Christian virtue that dared something arduous. On 
 the 27th, the Times remarked that : " An organization of 
 " resolute and audacious anarchists, habitually in possession 
 " of arms in defiance of the law, is maintained under the 
 " very walls of the Castle. . . . The theory that Irish 
 " disorders are merely the fruit of an unsatisfactory system 
 " of land tenure, is practically refuted by the threatening 
 " organization of crime in Dublin and the other large towns. 
 " . . . It is not amiss to observe that the ratepayers of 
 " Dublin have declared themselves strongly, at the recent 
 " municipal elections, in favour of extreme Nationalist 
 "views. Town Councils and Boards of Guardians through- 
 " out the country have in the same way purged themselves 
 " of their loyal members. A measure of local self-govern- 
 " ment, such as was demanded by the Dublin Conference, 
 " would throw uncontrolled power almost everywhere into 
 " the hands of the avowed enemies of the British connection, 
 "and the sympathisers with attacks on law and order, as 
 " strongholds of British influence." 
 
 The crime was, indeed, but part of a larger plot, to 
 assassinate the Lord Chancellor and all the Judges, in 
 Sackville Street, the chief street of Dublin. The following 
 was the account of it given by the Times, on November 28 : 
 " The objects of the attack were a number of Her Majesty's 
 "Judges who, it was known, were dining at Judge Harri- 
 " son's in Mountjoy Square, and must return through Sack- 
 " ville Street. Their lordships passed the corner of Abbey 
 " Street at a quarter-past eleven o'clock, a few minutes after
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 627 
 
 " the assassination was committed. It is believed that the 
 " presence of the half-dozen detectives at the corner of 
 " Abbey Street had the effect of frustrating the plot, and 
 " that, maddened by the close surveillance of the police, 
 " they directed their attack against them. The Judges in- 
 " eluded the Lord Chancellor and Mr. Justice O'Brien." 
 
 Two days afterwards, the murder of Mr. Field was 
 attempted in Dublin, because he was one of the jury at 
 the trial of Walsh for the murder of Constable Kavanagh. 
 But Mr. Field recovered of his serious wounds, although he 
 had been first knocked down, and then stabbed repeatedly, 
 and that in the presence of more than twenty bystanders. 
 Mallins was also stabbed in Gardiner Street, Dublin. The 
 effect of the attempted murder of Mr. Field was thus 
 narrated by the Times of November 29 : " The special 
 "jurors of Dublin, who belong chiefly to the most respect- 
 " able commercial classes, are deeply concerned at the 
 " position in which they find themselves, with secret 
 " assassins prowling about and ready to take vengeance 
 " upon them if they assist the authorities in enforcing the 
 " law, or even obey it themselves." 
 
 The same newspaper contained the report of a speech, at 
 Navan, by Davitt. He, too, was desirous of evincing the 
 Pope's chief virtue of daring. His speech was couched in 
 language " not calculated to promote the security of life 
 "and property in Ireland." But "he was received, with 
 " every mark of honour, in the town," by Dr. Nulty, Roman 
 Catholic Bishop of Mcath ; who "paid him the marked 
 " attention of sending his carriage to convey him from the 
 "railway station to the place of meeting." He spoke of 
 " the necessity " of the people " marching down to take pos- 
 " session of the rich soil in the plains " ; and added : " If the 
 " people of Ireland, if the tenant-farmers of the West will 
 44 pay rent that should go to feed their children, then let 
 " them die, and Ireland and humanity are well rid of such 
 "a coward race." He inculcated the virtue of daring. 
 "Archbishop Hughes declared, in 1848, that a man in
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "danger of death by hunger would be justified before God 
 " in seizing upon the bread on the sacrificial altar. How 
 "much more justifiable, then, for our people to seize upon what 
 " landlordism steals from them and their children every year ! 
 ". . . " Perpetuating landlordism by fixing rents ! Oh, 
 " no ! from the homes of 200,000 starving people ; from the 
 " graves of millions of our race ; from the depths of the 
 " wide Atlantic ; from the shades of murdered landlords, as 
 " well as from those of their famished victims ay, from the 
 "regions of the damned, where souls are expiating the 
 " crimes that were born of Irish landlordism, come shrieks 
 " of supplicating agony demanding the destruction of Irish 
 " landlordism. Let it perish, then, while the execrations of 
 " the damned form its fitting requiem, and may the hate 
 "and vengeance that have been born of its accursed acts, 
 " and that have defamed the character of this old Christian 
 " land, sink with it into the depths of an infamous and ever- 
 " lasting oblivion ! " Thus said Dr. Nulty. 
 
 At Cork on the 2ist of November, Mr. Redmond had 
 already spoken as follows : " The teaching of the Land 
 " League was that if any man was untrue to the cause he 
 " should be boycotted. Now, he said to them, if there was 
 " a farmer present, he advised him that, reduction or no 
 " reduction, he should not part with one cent of rent until 
 "he saw that himself and his family had all that was 
 " necessary for them. Consequently, he advised those 
 " present, and those whom his words might reach, to use 
 " moderately and wisely the expedient weapon of boycot- 
 "ting towards every man who betrayed the national cause. 
 " . . . He, as a Nationalist, yearned to see Ireland a free 
 ''nation, untrammelled by any shadow of British law ; but 
 " he would say to them that no league would do that ; it 
 " could only be accomplished by the swords and united 
 " arms of the Irish people. ... It was the duty of 
 "every man, not only in rebel Cork, but in Ireland, to pre- 
 " pare for that revolution." He again inculcated the Pope's 
 chief virtue of daring.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 629 
 
 Those firebrand speeches received no notice from the 
 authorities. The Government allowed the agitation to 
 proceed untrammelled, yet they must have known, by 
 experience oft-repeated, that crime and outrage always 
 follow such speeches, as surely as Gladstone's shadow 
 follows Gladstone. All men of sense and loyalty cried 
 shame on the Government for such supineness. But those 
 who were somewhat behind the scenes, divined, in the 
 inflammatory speeches of men who spoke with impunity, 
 without being either prosecuted or imprisoned as suspects, 
 they divined the initiative of the Government They knew 
 that the landlords had not been utterly ruined as yet, and 
 guessed that the seditious speeches had been encouraged 
 in order to deal them another and fatal blow. They were 
 aware that, while the Land Act was passing through the 
 House of Commons, Mr. Gladstone, who was so particular 
 in defining everything else, had steadily refused to define 
 the term " a fair rent." This expression was left to the per- 
 verted sense or cunning ingenuity of any Commissioner to 
 decide, in each case, as he might choose. The consequence 
 was that there were thousands of appeals. Seventeen valuers 
 were appointed at the desire of the Commissioners ; and 
 their character and bias may be guessed from the fact that 
 the landlords, in despair, always dropped their appeals. 
 
 This ambiguity of term in the Act ; this refusal of the 
 Government to prosecute Davitt and the others for their 
 seditious speeches ; and those crimes and outrages which 
 always went along with the agitation, were naturally put 
 together in men's minds. They remembered the agitation 
 and the outrages which preceded the Irish rising in 1806 ; 
 they recalled the murders and outrages between 1820 and 
 1829 : the atrocious crimes ; the awful massacres ; the case 
 of the Sheas of the South, and the burning of Wildgoose 
 Lodge in the County Louth ; they perceived that all the 
 outrages and agitation were directed to the attainment of 
 some Roman Catholic end ; they saw in them a similarity 
 of conduct and character, a common origin and a common
 
 aim ; the secret Jesuitical conclave for origin, and the 
 increase of the power of the Roman Catholic Church for 
 aim ; and men connected them with the Pttroleuses of Paris, 
 the Socialists of Germany, and the Nihilists of Russia. 
 
 Yet all that Mr. Trevelyan, the Chief Secretary, had to 
 say, when questioned by Sir W. Hart-Dyke, on November 
 30, in regard to the speeches of Davitt and Redmond, was : 
 " The conclusion of the Government is, that if such speeches 
 " continue to be made, there is no hope for peace and order 
 " in Ireland ; and that it is impossible to keep crime in 
 "check by any system of punishment, as long as these 
 " speeches, which experience tells us lead to crime, are 
 " freely and generally uttered." For all that, he had been 
 " recommended not to prosecute." Mr. Healy also made 
 a similar speech. But none of them were prosecuted. 
 The Government said they would bind them over to keep 
 the peace ; but Davitt announced that he would refuse to 
 be bound over ; and the Government dropped the matter 
 altogether, and did not even rescind his ticket of leave ! 
 
 The matter was, indeed, brought before the Queen's 
 Bench Division on December 5 ; but the Attorney-General 
 commenced his day's work by walking up to the prisoner, 
 Healy, and shaking hands with him ! He also acted as 
 legal adviser to Davitt ! * Two persons (one of them a 
 ticket-of-leave man) who had made incendiary speeches, 
 and then defied the Government of the Queen. Yet the 
 Queen's Attorney-General, forgetting to act his part, and 
 putting on a show of prosecuting, shook hands with the 
 one, and chatted with him pleasantly, while he acted as 
 counsel for the other ! Who could any longer doubt the 
 complicity of the Government ! 
 
 But perhaps those incendiary speeches the continuance 
 of which would destroy the peace of Ireland, kindle revo- 
 lution, and incite to crime were at least put a stop to ? 
 Mr. Parnell made a speech at Cork on the i/th of Decem- 
 ber. He clearly intimated that the agitation should not 
 1 See the Times and St. James's Gazette.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 631 
 
 cease. Why should it, when it had hitherto been the 
 means of obtaining for Ireland almost all that Ireland had 
 been taught to desire ? Yet Mr. Parnell's speech was not 
 stopped. Mr. Parnell further congratulated himself on his 
 " No Rent Manifesto." It had fulfilled its object. It had 
 been the engine which had excused Mr. Gladstone in pro- 
 posing terms of surrender, and had coerced the landlords 
 into accepting them. Moreover, he advised that the Land 
 League should be further supported. In fourteen months 
 the Land Act had reduced rents by only 70,000 ; while 
 the Land League, by its agitation, had diminished rents by 
 3,000,000 (another 3,000,000 having been wiped out by 
 the Arrears Act). Wherefore it was clear that the agita- 
 tion should be continued, and the organization perfected, 
 until everything should have been obtained. Let them, 
 therefore, subscribe to the funds for evicted tenants ; let 
 them support the National League, and show the British 
 that they were fully determined to have their rights. Mr. 
 Forster had, in a recent speech, denied that Parliament 
 had passed the Land Act in consequence of the Land 
 League agitation ; but Mr. Parnell challenged him and 
 the English Parliament to show, next session, that they 
 were strong enough to legislate for Ireland without such 
 things ; that is, without the agitation outside, which Mr. 
 Chamberlain had welcomed. 
 
 Was not that another incendiary speech ? Did it not 
 incite the agitation to be more exacting ? Did it not 
 stimulate the hatred of race against race ? Did it not 
 nourish the party of sedition, and depress the party of 
 order ? Nor was that the only speech likely to destroy 
 the peace of Ireland. On December 20, Michael Davitt 
 was at it again. He spoke at Batley, and said 1 that 
 " the agitation on the land question would be the means 
 " of obtaining Home Rule, and if they abandoned it, they 
 ' abandoned one of the most powerful levers yet handled 
 " for the overthrow of alien rule in Ireland." Yet Davitt 
 
 was not locked up. 
 
 1 Times t December 21.
 
 632 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Nor was that the only incendiary speech tending to 
 destroy the peace of Ireland. On Monday, the i8th, 
 Mr. Biggar, M.P., spoke at Waterford, and said : 1 "To 
 " show how the Ministers of the English Government 
 "in Ireland acted when they were not bound by the 
 " strong force of public opinion, he might refer to the 
 "case of Francis Hynes. The jury in that case were 
 "allowed to disperse, and the conviction by them was 
 " illegal according to British law. That fact was known to 
 " Lord Spencer, that bloodthirsty English peer. . . . 
 " He allowed that young man to be hanged. If he was 
 "amenable to public opinion in Ireland, he would not do 
 " that. . . . Then there was the case of Miles Joyce. He 
 " made his last confession and protested his innocence, and 
 " they, as Catholics, would believe that. The Government 
 " knew that he was innocent, and he (Mr. Biggar) believed 
 " that Lord Spencer sacrificed that man's life for the sake 
 " of an appearance of consistency before the English people. 
 " Again, there was the case of Walsh, hanged at Galway. 
 " He declared his innocence on the gallows, and yet he 
 " was hanged. No one in Ireland should support the 
 "Whig party. Lord Spencer let Myles Joyce be hanged , 
 "though Joyce protested, with his dying breath, that he 
 " was innocent." 
 
 On December 22, 1882, Michael Davitt enjoyed the use 
 of the Town-hall in Bermondsey for a speech, and said : 
 " It was necessary that he should allude to his speech at 
 " Navan on the 26th of November a speech which in Eng- 
 " lish opinion was not calculated to produce peace in Ireland. 
 ". . . Advocating Home Rule in Ireland, he said he 
 " should, as an Irishman and a Catholic, repudiate the idea 
 " that a local parliament in Dublin would mean Catholic 
 " political ascendency. The situation in Ireland was com- 
 " parable to that in England 'alien it drove James II. from 
 " the tlirone" That speech was not calculated to produce 
 peace in Ireland ; and Michael Davitt was not locked up. 
 1 St James's Gazette, December 21.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 633 
 
 Oh.no! On Sunday, December 24, Michael Davitt was 
 honoured by being allowed to address an audience on the 
 land question at Wolverhampton, although the Chief 
 Secretary had said, but a short while before, that " if such 
 "speeches were continued, there was no hope for peace 
 " and order in Ireland, and that it would be impossible to 
 " keep crime in check by any system of punishment." As 
 the Government allowed such speeches to be continued, of 
 course they desired that there should be no peace or order 
 in Ireland, and that crime should not be checked. 
 
 Here are some extracts from Davitt's speech at Wolver- 
 hampton : "Lord Derby and that poor disgraced coercionist 
 " Mr. Forster, declared that the famines which recurred in 
 " Ireland every ten or fifteen years, were due to periodic 
 " visitations of Providence, and to over- population ; but 
 " the real cause was the system of land laws in that country 
 " a system which was robbing the soil as well as the 
 " people who cultivated it, restricting cultivation, and para- 
 " lysing industry. . . . The land had been wrested 
 "from its rightful purpose, inasmuch as it was created 
 " by God for the beneficent purpose of sustaining man, 
 " who could not live without the soil. He maintained that 
 " the Government, which had brought about the starvation 
 " on the west coast of Ireland, was bound to maintain the 
 " people during such a calamity. . . . He did not 
 " speak in the language of ambiguous cant, and he would 
 " repeat, that landlordism was a system of robbery and 
 " plunder, and as long as the Government and the English 
 " people allowed such a system to rule in Ireland, it would 
 " be the father of agrarian crime and the source of famine 
 " and discontent. . . . They would have to apply the 
 " lancet to the seat of the evil, and cut out the corrupting 
 " body of Irish landlordism from the social life of the 
 "people. Abolition, complete and total, was the only 
 "remedy of the Irish social evil, was the only way in 
 " which the settlement of the Irish land question could be 
 " effected ; and, notwitlistanding Lord Derby s declaration
 
 634 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "that no more legislation on the question would take place 
 "for some time, he maintained that Lord Derby knew 
 " nothing- of the question. He (the speaker) did, however. 
 " The remedies for Irish famine and Irish discontent and 
 " English coercion, he believed to be the abolition of Irish 
 " landlordism, and the grant of Irish self-government." 
 
 Still such speeches continued to be made. On Decem- 
 ber 28, the Burdett Hall, in Limehouse, was placed at 
 Michael Davitt's disposal. He spoke on "the condition 
 "of Ireland," and said: "Unless Earl Spencer changed 
 " his tactics of vindictiveness and coercion, the time would 
 "come when even Englishmen would demand, in the 
 " interests of the peace of Ireland, the recall of the present 
 " Lord Lieutenant. But when Earl Spencer ceased to 
 " rigorously apply coercion, and endeavoured to reform 
 "any department of Ireland, he would be thwarted by 
 " that policy through which every past Government had 
 " mismanaged the affairs of Ireland. . . . Ireland would 
 "have to be governed according to Irish ideas, and Irish 
 "ideas were better understood by Irishmen than by 
 " Englishmen. ... In Ireland, from the highest to the 
 "meanest justice of the peace, every one was a politician, 
 " and belonged to the landlord class. . . . Ninety-eight 
 " per cent, of the magistrates belonged to the most pernicious 
 " class in the country the landlords ; and out of these 
 " at least eighty per cent, belonged to a religion against 
 " which he had nothing to say, but it was not the religion 
 " of the majority of the people of Ireland. If there was 
 " power in truth and he believed there was and a de- 
 " termination in the character of the Irish people which 
 " he knew existed to persevere in a just cause, Irish 
 " landlordism would yet be abolished in the not distant 
 " future, and England would resort to effectual justice, 
 " which alone could solve the problem of Irish poverty 
 " and Irish discontent" 
 
 That was not enough for the Government Ireland was 
 still too peaceful. Crime was not rampant enough. Yet
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 another speech, therefore, must be made. On January 4, 
 1883, the Albert Hall, in Leeds, was secured for Michael 
 Davitt, to make another speech in condemnation of Dublin 
 Castle rule, and of Irish landlords. He said, alluding to 
 the promised County Franchise Bill for England : " No- 
 " thing of the sort would be conceded to Ireland. That 
 "would only be another illustration to the Irish people that 
 " nothing could be got from England unless wrung from 
 " English statesmen by the power of Irish agitation and the 
 " determination of the Irish movement. . . . The Irish 
 " element, together with tJte English Radical element, would 
 " bring about that, in a few years' time, other people than 
 " there were at present would be found representing the 
 " constituencies in the House of Commons. Whether those 
 " measures were extended to Ireland or not, it would make 
 " no difference to the present Irish movement. // could 
 " not alter their resohition that Castle rule and Irish land- 
 " lordism must be abolished? 
 
 Yet another speech, on January 10, because Ireland 
 was not yet excited enough for the purposes of the 
 Government. On that day, Michael Davitt received an 
 honourable entertainment at Birkenhead, for a speech on 
 " distress in Ireland." He said : " The distress was caused 
 " by the people being compelled, by English laws, to part 
 " with their earnings for the support of an idle, hostile, 
 "useless class. This class, numbering from 15,000 to 
 " 20,000, had extracted from the poorest country in Europe 
 "the enormous sum of from 15 to 18 million pounds. 
 "Ireland had had enough of futile agitations and semi-in- 
 " surrections, and they were going to fight it out this time" 
 
 At Liverpool, on January 12, Michael Davitt said, on 
 the same subject, in reference to the Land League funds : 
 "Those funds were forwarded from America for the re- 
 " moval of landlordism, which was the cause of the famine, 
 " and landlordism must be sent out of Ireland bag and 
 " baggage. Dublin Castle had committed the seven deadly 
 "sins which would inevitably damn it. When England
 
 636 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " was engaged in war with a powerful foe, then, perhaps, 
 " would be Ireland's opportunity." 
 
 It appears, therefore, that the Government, who had 
 declared, through the responsible Minister, that it would be 
 impossible to maintain order in Ireland if such speeches 
 should be made, and impossible to restrain the commis- 
 sion of crimes, so far from stopping the speeches, had 
 evidently allowed Davitt to made a pleasant tour of 
 agitation ; and to procure the Town-halls in the large 
 towns to make his incendiary speeches in. Nor was it 
 only the ticket-of-leave man who was employed in this 
 way. Archbishop Croke acted similarly. The Solicitor- 
 General for Ireland, Mr. Naish, was standing for Mallow ; 1 
 and O'Brien, the editor of United Ireland, against whom a 
 prosecution was pending for seditious writings, was also 
 contesting the borough. Dr. Croke, the Archbishop of 
 Cashel, then wrote the following letter to the constituency : 
 " Were I connected with the borough, either as an elector 
 " or a non-elector, I should most assuredly exercise every 
 " legitimate influence that I possessed to secure the trium- 
 phant return to Parliament of the gifted, fearless, pat- 
 " riotic, and uncompromising editor of United Ireland" 
 This John O'Brien, together with Richard Hodnett and 
 James Gillooly, were being tried at Bantry, at this very 
 time ; and on January 9, O'Brien and Hodnett were sen- 
 tenced to two months', and Gillooly to three months' 
 imprisonment with hard labour. The justice, in passing 
 sentence, thus expressed himself : " They had to ask them- 
 " selves, were landlords and farmers alike to be denounced 
 " in a manner which might excite fear and panic ? . . . 
 "The first of the speakers said the Land League had 
 " been only nominally suppressed. The people were 
 "exhorted not to forget the teachings they had received 
 " for the last two years. Now, if there was anything 
 " which it would be desirable for them to forget, it was 
 " those teachings. . . . Whiteboyism had been rampant 
 1 Times, January 8.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 637 
 
 " in the country for the last two years. The country had 
 "been saturated with the blood of its inhabitants. Jurors 
 " were afraid to find verdicts, and witnesses were afraid to 
 "give evidence. Judges on the bench .had been assailed, 
 " and an attempt made to slaughter a juror who had given 
 "a verdict according to his conscience. In these circum- 
 " stances, they had a number of persons deliberately and 
 "designedly called together by placards of a strong char- 
 " acter, meeting on a common platform, and indulging in 
 " language calculated to excite panic and terror, to drive 
 " those people out of the country who had the means to go. 
 " They could not come to any other conclusion than that 
 "the speeches delivered by the defendants were calculated 
 "to have that effect." 
 
 This very O'Brien was, on January 9, allowed to be in 
 Mallow, and made a speech in which he said : " Naish was 
 "an enemy. Mr. Naish came there as the champion and 
 "the apologist of jury-packing, witness-bribery, the gag, 
 " the rope, and the plank bed. He came there to try to 
 " make Mallow an accomplice in one of the most hateful 
 " systems of suppression and repression that was ever in- 
 dented in the bloodstained torture chambers of English 
 "rule in Ireland a system, he would say it deliberately, 
 " which in the most crimeless country in Europe was cal- 
 "culated to drive sober and freedom-loving people to 
 " madness and despair." That was the O'Brien whom Dr 
 Croke publicly supported ! and whom Mr. Gladstone's 
 Government allowed to appear on the platform ! 
 
 No. LXXXV. 
 
 THE substance of the speech by Mr. Forster, to which Mr. 
 Parnell made allusion, was thus given by the Times of 
 December 16, 1882: "Mr. Forster expressed himself with 
 " much-needed plainness when he said that ' Nothing can 
 "'be more unpatriotic and more foolish than any concession to
 
 638 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " ' Irisli disorder, or any compromise with Irish disloyalty' 
 ". . . The want of moral courage in dealing with Irish 
 "affairs encourages everything that is turbulent, foolish, and 
 "impracticable ; and it discourages all who are wise enough 
 " to understand wherein lie the true interests of Ireland. The 
 " orderly classes in Ireland can allege that the Government 
 " of this country, wliether composed of Whigs or Tories, has, 
 " time and again, shirked plain but disagreeable duties, and 
 "condescended to compromises and concessions which come 
 " within the scope of Mr. Forsters condemnation. Clamour 
 " has been yielded to, and ' Irish ideas ' have been counten- 
 " anced, though well known to run clean counter to natural 
 " laws, which no legislature or nation can defy with im- 
 punity. At the same time, the true remedies have been 
 " overlooked until things became desperate" 
 
 Did the evils which afflicted Ireland "depend upon 
 " Governments and Administrations " ? Were they not 
 fomented by the Government which permitted Davitt to 
 roam over the country making incendiary speeches, after 
 the Chief Secretary had deliberately stated to the House 
 of Commons that, if such speeches should continue to be 
 made, it would be impossible to maintain order in Ireland, 
 and impossible to restrain the multiplication of crimes ? 
 Was all this the work of that dark and malign Society of 
 Jesuits, who have been plotting to bring about, by the 
 means they have so often employed, the independence and 
 autonomy of Ireland as a Roman Catholic country, and 
 the destruction of the Empire of Great Britain and all her 
 ancient liberties ? 
 
 That this has been the aim of the " victorious struggles," 
 namely, " to conquer the liberty of the (Roman) Catholic 
 " worship," was sufficiently shown by the leading article in 
 the Pope's organ, the Journal de Rome, of December 6, 
 1882: " M. de Giers, the Minister of Russia, was this 
 "morning received by His Holiness. It is, indeed, not 
 " useless to take advantage of this fact to remind the 
 " European Governments which do not form part of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 639 
 
 "the Church, what assistance they may expect, in their 
 "embarrassments and difficulties, from the pacifying in- 
 "fluence of the Holy See. A terrible revolution is, at 
 " this moment, desolating Ireland. As in Russia, so 
 " also in Ireland, assassination, that weapon more formid- 
 " able than an Jmeute, has been the means employed by 
 "the rebels to upset and destroy the institutions of their 
 " country. ... In vain will England try to pacify Ireland 
 " by means of Land Acts. All her concessions only serve 
 "to encourage tJie revolt. . . . Well; in that country, 
 "still vibrating with the victorious struggles which she 
 ' ; has maintained for vindicating the liberty of (Roman) 
 ' Catholic worship, the revolution would have continued 
 " without intermission and without end, if the bishops had 
 " not recalled the Irish Catholics to the law of the Gospel 
 "and to their duty as citizens; if the bishops had not 
 "spoken to them of the horrors of sedition. . . . 
 " Russia, too, might bear in mind that she likewise incor- 
 " porated, in her vast empire, a Catholic nation, as unhappy 
 "and miserable as is the Irish nation, and, like Ireland, 
 "also very imperfectly pacified." That is to say, the 
 assassinations in Ireland were deliberately planned and 
 executed, in order to vindicate, for the Roman Catholics, 
 full liberty for that religion which permits, nay, even sug- 
 gests and encourages, the use of such bloody means. As 
 in Ireland, so in Poland both Roman Catholic countries 
 the knife and the rifle, revolution and dynamite, have 
 been employed for the destruction of the institutions of 
 the two empires, in order to procure liberty for the religion 
 that moulds such assassins ! 
 
 Such a scheme is so diabolical, that it would be hard to 
 believe that the Jesuit Society could have been guilty of 
 it, were it not that history indubitably points, with steady 
 and unerring finger, to many Jesuit conspiracies and many 
 machinations as diabolical in former years. But how is it, 
 then, that the Pope did not denounce and banish them, as 
 Pope Ganganelli did before (1774), with scathing language
 
 640 KECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 of bitter denunciation ? Can it be that the Papal Court, 
 whose battle the Jesuits pretend to be fighting, is really in 
 league with the Jesuits? or can it be that the Jesuit Society 
 has a power at the Papal Court which Popes have learned 
 to fear? We remember how Pio Nono, when warned that 
 the Jesuits were about to poison him, replied that it had 
 not yet got the length of deeds so far it was only an 
 intention : " non e che un pio desiderio" Yet the Papal 
 organ, the Journal de Rome, of Dec. 31, 1882, could vaunt 
 itself on the number of Jesuits who were employed by the 
 British Government, mentioning Father Alphonse Rdnard, 
 Father Stephen Perry, Father Stephenson, Father James 
 Stephenson, Father McSweeny, and others. 
 
 On the 23rd of January, 1883, there was published a 
 letter of the Pope to Cardinal McCabe and the Irish 
 Roman Catholic bishops, on the affairs of Ireland. It was 
 "better late than never"; if indeed any effect could be 
 expected to flow from it. The practical effect of Lord 
 Spencer's vigorous measures, of the acute inquiries by the 
 army of detectives, of the prompt hangings in Galway and 
 the South, of the Fenian informations, and of the Dublin 
 prosecutions, was doubtless great ; and the Pope was 
 anxious to reap that sowing, and to induce persons to 
 attribute, to his benign influence, the lessened number and 
 ferocity of the cattle-mutilations, women-cardings, and pot- 
 shots at landlords from behind walls. If he had the power 
 to put a stop to those horrors, why did he not do it before ? 
 Why did he not, before that time, forbid priests from making 
 inflammatory speeches at seditious meetings ? Why did he 
 not shut Dr. Croke's mouth, and forbid him from eulo- 
 gising the Land Leaguers and canonizing Michael Davitt 
 and John Devoy? He did not do so. But he sought to 
 gain the credit for Lord Spencer's energy, as soon as the 
 Gladstonian Cabinet permitted the Viceroy to act against 
 the agitation. The Pope's letter was dated Jan. I, 1883. 
 In that letter he rightly exhorted Roman Catholics " not 
 " to permit their efforts to transgress the limits of duty and
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 641 
 
 " religion. . . . It is just and legitimate for those who 
 " are suffering to seek to defend their rights by means 
 "permitted by the law ; but it is not permissible to have 
 " recourse to crime in order to obtain redress for wrongs 
 " undergone." This exhortation, unhappily, passed un- 
 heeded. Did Dr. Croke cease to regard Davitt and Devoy 
 as heroes and patriots, and to hold them up to his flocks 
 as objects for imitation ? Did Dr. Nulty repudiate his 
 doctrines of socialism and revolution ? The Pope's news- 
 papers refrained from publishing that letter of the Pope, 
 until they had seen it in the Times on Jan. 23 ; then only 
 they printed it, on Jan. 26. Those newspapers, the Journal 
 de Rome and the Moniteur de Rome, probably found the 
 Christian exhortation to be eminently distasteful. Dis- 
 tasteful it probably was to the priesthood of Ireland, if we 
 may judge by a paragraph in the Melbourne Age 1 : "Among 
 " the passengers by the Austral, lately arrived in our port, 
 " were twenty-two Roman Catholic priests, including a 
 " bishop and his chaplain. The conduct of the clergy, 
 " with the exception of the bishop, was most distasteful to 
 " the other passengers, and also to the crew of the vessel. 
 " Upon any toast being drunk to the health of Her Majesty 
 " the Queen, the most marked disrespect was shown by the 
 " Catholic priests referred to, who would remain seated and 
 "covered. The same course was also pursued when the 
 " National Anthem was being played." 
 
 It struck many persons as a most marvellous and in- 
 credible fact, that, as early as the year 1879, before Mr. 
 Gladstone returned to power, Mr. Parnell could accurately 
 predict the effect of Mr. Gladstone's legislation ; while 
 Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Forster, the Irish Secretary, Lord 
 Chancellor Selborne, and another member of the Cabinet, 
 Lord Carlingford, were utterly wrong in 1881, in thf.-ir 
 predictions of the probable effect of their Land Act The 
 Ministers ascribed to it the very contrary effect to that 
 which it accomplished. Did that arise from want of fore- 
 1 St. James's Gazette, Jan. 26, 1883. 
 
 T T
 
 642 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 sight, or want of candour ? From an absence of sagacity, 
 or an absence of veracity ? Did they know and deny ? or 
 did one of them assert what he knew to be false, while the 
 others, parrot-like, repeated what he had said ? Be that 
 as it may, nevertheless the fact is undoubted that Mr. 
 Parnell, who had been persuaded to conduct the agitation, 
 knew perfectly well the effects of his action ; while Mr. 
 Gladstone's predictions were utterly falsified. 
 
 At Tipperary, on Sep. 27, 1879, l Mr. Parnell said: 
 "But if the right of being a landlord becomes an un- 
 " desirable thing as I am sure after this winter, and 
 "perhaps during this winter, it will become you will find 
 " there will be none of tliose landlord purchases of Irish land, 
 " and that then the landlord will be glad enough to facilitate 
 " the obtaining by purchase of the farms by the tenants who 
 " occupy them" 
 
 At Newry, on Oct. 16, 1879: "One of the consequences 
 "of the agitation they are carrying on, and which they 
 " intended to stick to which he believed would be one of 
 " the most successful agitations that had ever taken place 
 " in this or any other country would be that tJte market 
 "for land would be restricted to the tenants. When an estate 
 " of an encumbered landlord was put into the market, there 
 " would be no buyers, because it would not be such a pleasant 
 " or profitable thing to be an Irish landlord as it used to be. 
 " The tenants then would have an opportunity of purchas- 
 ing their holdings under the Bright clauses." 
 
 Now compare with those predictions, the asseverations 
 in 1 88 1 of the Ministers who were supposed to have de- 
 vised, and who carried the Land Act. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone said : " I have heard the argument used 
 "many times in these discussions, that after this Bill passes, 
 " there will be no purchasers of land in Ireland but the State. 
 " I do not believe that at all ; but this I must say, that 
 "this proposition, that the State is to buy nothing except 
 "within the limit of twenty years' purchase (of the judicial 
 1 Freeman s Journal.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 643 
 
 " rent), is in my opinion most unjust The Government 
 " thought of introducing a limit of value ; but I am bound 
 " to say that, adverting to the average sales that have 
 " taken place, we placed the limit at seven years higher 
 " (twenty-seven years' purchase] than my honourable friend 
 "proposes" (Hansard, cclxiii. 387.) 
 
 " In a moderate, but at the same time a perfectly 
 "appreciable degree, the effect of the legislation then 
 "(1870) proposed, has been to raise the capital value of 
 " estates in Ireland, as far as the landlords are concerned. 
 " I may repeat that Her Majesty's Government entertain 
 " the same hope so far as this Bill is concerned." (Hansard, 
 cclxiii. 1696.) 
 
 " Rents have increased under the action of the Land 
 "Act of 1870. I am not now speaking of undue increase. 
 " Upon the increased rents, a larger number of years' pur- 
 chase has been obtained where the property has come 
 "into the market, and that, sir, was the end of the charge 
 " of confiscation with respect to the Land Act." (Hansard, 
 cclxi. 586.) 
 
 Mr. Forster, the Chief Secretary for Ireland: "My firm 
 " belief is that no damage can be proved. On the other 
 " hand, if the landlord were compensated, you would com- 
 " pensate him for conferring on him a benefit." (Hansard, 
 ccix. 1 1 66.) 
 
 Lord Selborne, the Lord High Chancellor, told the 
 Lords : " I deny that it will diminish, in any degree what- 
 " ever, the rights of the landlord or the value of the interest 
 " he possesses. I never should agree to such a proposal." 
 (Hansard, cclxi v. 532.) 
 
 Lord Carlingford, the Lord Privy Seal, and formerly 
 Irish Secretary, said : " My Lords, I maintain that the 
 " provisions of the Bill will cause the landlord no money 
 "loss whatever." (Hansard, cclxiv. 252.) 
 
 Now as to the facts : The Land Commissioners fixed 
 the rents as " fair rents," and asserted that " the tenants 
 " will pay to the day," and " the rents will be paid like
 
 644 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " dividends at the Bank of Ireland, or nearly so." Yet the 
 rents are and have, ever since the passing of the Act, been 
 worse paid than before ; and land will not sell at all, not 
 even at ten years' purchase. 
 
 Let it not be supposed that the agitators were more far- 
 seeing than Mr. Gladstone or Lord Selborne. Yet it may 
 be asserted that the dark and secret conclave which de- 
 vised both the agitation and the policy, was more far- 
 seeing than either the legislators or the agitators ; while 
 both agitators and legislators apparently followed the lead 
 or obeyed the commands of the secret conclave. 
 
 No. LXXXVI. 
 
 I PRESUME that, on consideration of all these facts, there 
 is no one so foolish as to suppose that the agitation in 
 Ireland was due, in the first place, to Irish patriots or 
 Nationalists. No one supposes that the great secret power 
 that worked it was confined and limited to Irish aspira- 
 tions. If there be any one so foolish, let him reflect on 
 what happened in India at the beginning of the year 1883. 
 A recent convert to Romanism, an obedient son of the 
 Jesuits, and therefore their tool, was appointed by Mr. 
 Gladstone to the post of Governor-General of India. At 
 once we found the great secret power at work in that 
 distant land, with exactly the same aims that they evinced 
 in Ireland. As was said at the time, they were " creating 
 " a second Ireland in India." Lord Ripon began by 
 " creating an Indian public opinion." That was a circum- 
 locution for "political agitation." Lord Ripon was the 
 Parnell of India " the pioneer of a Home Rule party in 
 " India." He educated them to ask for, and they did ask 
 for, " A free and united India, ruled by its natives. . . . 
 " We have the vision of an approaching time when, from 
 " the Himalayas to Cape Comorin, a free, educated, and 
 " united country will cease to be the plunder-ground of
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 645 
 
 " aliens." Thus wrote a native Indian, in a magazine called 
 Progress. But there are two Indias : the one deluded by 
 the Jesuits, and the other not ; just as there are two Ire- 
 lands. 
 
 The upper classes, and most of the middle classes in 
 Ireland, Roman Catholic as well as Protestant, were in- 
 dignant with the English Government for their numerous 
 " concessions to the Nationalists." They were anxious that 
 the Government should put down the outrages and anarchy, 
 by means of an energetic policy. Those classes, however, 
 were but a small portion of the Irish population, and could 
 be safely ignored. All the small shopkeepers, all the small 
 farmers, all the artisans, and all the labourers, were 
 enemies to order and hated the British Government. The 
 Roman Catholic priests were the causes of this bitter and 
 seditious feeling. "Some of them abused their sacred 
 " office to concoct false declarations of innocence by dying 
 " criminals, with the design of casting discredit on the 
 " law." i 
 
 Davitt was the tool of the sacerdotal agitators, and a 
 very able one too. It was his business to declare their 
 thoughts and utter their prophecies. On Feb. 7, 1883, he 
 thus performed his rdle : " A system that cannot defend 
 " itself in the political arena, except by the imprisonment 
 "of its opponents, is fast marching to its doom. The 
 " spirit of the Land League, together with the rapid 
 "spread of advanced land reform principles in Great 
 " Britain as in Ireland, will soon complete the overthrow 
 " of land monopoly in these countries. I expect to see 
 " in a few years' time that is, after the enfranchisement 
 " of the industrial classes the land recognised as national 
 "property, the farmer, with State security, enjoying the 
 "right to occupancy of his holding without fear of dis- 
 " turbance or interference with his capital in the same, 
 " and the unearned increment of the national property 
 "appropriated to the benefit of the whole community. 
 1 Times, Feb. 7.
 
 646 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " No other settlement of the land question will meet the 
 " exigencies of impending social upheavals consequent upon 
 " the spread of popular education and the accumulating 
 " wrongs of 'labour ; and it should be the duty of present 
 " statesmanship to look ahead so as to stem the tide of 
 " the advancing social revolution by just concessions rather 
 " than resort to the old methods of exasperation and 
 " futile repression." 
 
 Let us, however, call into court an exceptional witness, 
 who knew nothing of the conspiracy in high places, and 
 hear his testimony as to the effects of Mr. Gladstone's 
 legislation. Are not the conclusions to which that states- 
 man arrived, the same as those to which any one, who 
 assumes Mr. Gladstone's complicity with the priesthood 
 and agitators, would arrive ? Lord Cranbrook said at 
 Maidstone, on February 9 : " Has it ever struck you what 
 " has been done in Ireland, and how the country has been 
 "treated? I will venture to say that no country in the 
 " world has, for the last fifty or sixty years, had more reason 
 " to say that England was disposed to redress its real griev- 
 " ances, to foster everything that was good within it, ivilh the 
 " view of bringing it out to the advantage of the country. It 
 " sometimes grieves me to think that fifty years of national 
 " education should have been bestowed upon Ireland, and 
 " that the country should now prove to be a country of 
 " traitors in the main, who have been the teachers in the 
 " schools of the country in which the children have been 
 " brought up for the last fifty years with national money 
 " taken out of our pockets. Hoiv is it we find, at the end of 
 " that time, that the population in the greater part of Ireland, 
 " / ivill not say is actually committed to violence and crime, 
 " but is to a great extent concurring vvith it ? Surely the 
 "crimes of Ireland might account for some of the distress 
 " and troubles which have fallen in judgment upon that 
 " unhappy country. It is said that the evil deeds of a man 
 " bring with them condign punishment ; and if that is so, 
 " the people in Ireland, in their distress, must know that,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 647 
 
 " from every part of their country, with small exception, 
 " the blood of the innocent men has been crying to the 
 " heavens for vengeance, year after year, and age after age, 
 " without redress. At last we find that the law is being 
 " enforced, and that agrarian crime is diminishing. But, 
 "gentlemen, is there one of you who can help asking, why is 
 " it that this law was not put in operation before ? Why is 
 "it that, when this Government entered into office with 
 "distinct warnings contained in the celebrated letter of 
 " Lord Beaconsfield, and with the warnings given them by 
 " the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland from his place in Parlia- 
 * ment, with all the documents in their possession showing 
 "what was brewing beneath the surface in that country, 
 " that they declared that they would not take exceptional 
 " measures, but would govern according to the ordinary 
 "laws? . . . As the Clerkenwell explosion had brought about 
 " the destruction of the Church ; as the outrages and crimes in 
 " Ireland brought in the Land Act of 1880; so it was that 
 " the Irish people, believing the Government amenable to 
 " this tremendous pressure, came to the conclusion that if 
 " their crimes were deep enough, if blood floived freely enough, 
 " they would be able to attain their further desires. They 
 " were silent while the Conservatives were in power, be- 
 " cause they knew that outrages would at once be put 
 " down with a firm hand ; and therefore it was not until the 
 " Liberals came into office that the flood-gates were loosened 
 " and the evils sent forth ivhich have been desolating Ireland for 
 " the last two years. . . . Lord Hartington says it would 
 "be absurd to give local government to Ireland until we 
 " have an assurance that a proper use will be made of it ; 
 " but Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Courtney say that, when local 
 "government is extended to England, it should also be given 
 " to Ireland. They are, they say, against Home Rule ; but 
 " by the plan they propose they would establish a com- 
 " mittee of sedition in every village and town. There 
 " would be an army of Land League associations in every 
 " union, in a position to take the public money from its
 
 648 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " proper uses, and foster with it a revolution in the country. 
 " Yet these people say they are firmly opposed to a separa- 
 " tion of England and Ireland. But if they are guilty of 
 " the wickedness and crime of giving Ireland local govern- 
 " ment while it is in such a state as this, if they are guilty 
 " of the folly of treating Irishmen as Englishmen in this 
 " matter, then in fact they are furthering the separation of 
 " the two countries, and while saying thev never would consent, 
 " were in fact consenting in detail. . . . Gentlemen, I say 
 " if there was an agreement with these people, who were sup- 
 " posed to know all about the organization, that they should 
 " be let out of prison, in order to control it for a time, when 
 " we know that these men zvere pledged to their very lips to go 
 " in for Home Rule, then that agreement must be borne in 
 " mind" 
 
 On the Qth of February, the Chief Secretary for Ireland, 
 Mr. Trevelyan, made a speech, from which any man of 
 sense would have supposed that his Government the 
 Government of Mr. Gladstone had for two years been in 
 conspiracy with the Home Rulers and Fenians to produce 
 the very state of things which Mr. Trevelyan so graphically 
 described. An ultra-Tory ex-Cabinet Minister, and an 
 ultra-Liberal Chief Secretary, arrived at the same con- 
 clusions, without assuming that the Prime Minister was 
 the chief actor in the deplorable evils of the country. 
 Neither of them could account for the facts. They were 
 puzzled. Yet an easy explanation was at hand. If the 
 Prime Minister had been assumed to have been in the 
 intrigue, the puzzle would have been solved, and all the 
 results would have been plainly accounted for. Discontent 
 is one thing ; organized murder and outrage is another. 
 Poor peasants and Government officials had been murdered. 
 Labourers and gentlemen who refused to aid, or who 
 threatened to divulge the conspiracy, had been syste- 
 matically outraged. Could this be justified, could it even 
 be accounted for, on the ground of bad legislation centuries 
 ago ? If not, why be so insane as to suppose that " re-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 649 
 
 " medial legislation " would put an end to the assassinations 
 and outrages ? No ; the anarchy and crimes had another 
 cause. They stood on another basis. If the lower classes 
 were those who supported the conspiracy, would the lower- 
 ing of the franchise (as Mr. Gladstone proposed), and the 
 increase of the power of those classes (by Mr. Gladstone's 
 policy of constructing County Boards), lessen or increase 
 the evil ? Which ? It was not discontent at some laws 
 which caused the agitation, and no legislation would re- 
 move it as long as the aim of the agitation was separation 
 from Protestant England, and the autonomy of Roman 
 Catholic Ireland. 
 
 Directly after the Phoenix Park murders the Times 
 could see this, and wrote : " The policy of conciliation was 
 "founded on a combination of credulity and malice. The 
 "Cabinet was induced to run open-mouthed to the re- 
 " presentatives of Irish disaffection with offers of surrender. 
 " Mr. Forster, who knew by a hard experience what the 
 " Irish question really meant, and who manfully stood by 
 "his convictions, was deserted by his colleagues and left 
 "no choice but to resign. The history of this transac- 
 tion, though its details may be decorously veiled, is 
 "perfectly understood by the public. Mr. Forster was 
 " the victim of an intrigue which was worked from within 
 " the Cabinet, and zvhich was industriously developed outside 
 " tJirough ' organs ' and organizations. The personality and 
 " the policy of the Chief Secretary were alike assailed un- 
 " scrupulously and unsparingly ; and a sham crisis was got 
 " up, to precipitate his enforced resignation, precisely at the 
 " time when, as he stated in Parliament, his measures might 
 " have been made successful by persistence and courage." 
 
 Was that true, or was it not true ? If true, why did Mr. 
 Gladstone act, or permit others in the Cabinet to act, in 
 the way described ? Why did he remove Mr. Forster just 
 when he was about succeeding in putting down the crime 
 and calming the agitation ? 
 
 Above all, where was Mr. Gladstone all the time that the
 
 650 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 police were unravelling the tangled web of the conspiracy 
 in Dublin ? Lord Cowper, Mr. Forster, Mr. Burke, the 
 judges, the juries, did their duty in the midst of the con- 
 spirators, and did not shirk it, although the fear of a 
 violent death was ever before them. Mr. Gladstone escaped 
 to Cannes for his health, and enjoyed himself, pelting 
 sugar-plums in the Carnival. 
 
 The Cabinet met on February 6, amid a crowd of " extra 
 " police." The Times narrated that : " Shortly after two 
 "o'clock Earl Spencer, who had been some time engaged 
 "in the Privy Council Office, of which he is President, 
 "walked through the private passage into the Cabinet 
 " Chamber. He was guarded by two Irish detectives, who 
 " followed his Excellency in all his movements. Lord 
 " Hartington, who was also accompanied by a detective, 
 " walked over from the War Office into Downing Street. 
 " . . . The detective, who yesterday even entered into 
 " the Premier's official residence with the Marquis, is the 
 "same person who so zealously guarded Mr. Gladstone 
 " previous to his departure for Cannes. Sir William Har- 
 " court has now a detective sleeping in his house in Grafton 
 " Street." 
 
 Of course Mr. Gladstone hurried home to share the 
 danger, and to guide the helm of the State? On the 
 contrary, the loth of Feb. brought the intelligence that 
 " Mr. Gladstone will prolong his visit to Cannes." He 
 will not preside at his full-dress dinner. He will not be 
 present at the opening of Parliament! How very unac- 
 countable ! Surely Mr. Gladstone cannot be averse to 
 the present state of anarchy ! Perhaps he fears to do his 
 duty? On the 2ist the public learned that he was "quite 
 "well again," and enjoying his walks. But, to lull sus- 
 picion, we were informed that : " Orders have been issued 
 "that the guard of police on duty at the Chateau Scott 
 " is to be doubled, and that a strict watch is to be main- 
 "tained during the night." As if Mr. Gladstone could 
 really be in danger from his Irish allies ! unless, indeed,
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 651 
 
 he thought he had gone far enough, and had refused to 
 go forward at their bidding, and, therefore, stopped away 
 at Cannes, and was guarded by French police ? 
 
 Mr. Trevelyan, the Chief Secretary for Ireland, in ad- 
 dressing his constituents, asserted that the Land League 
 was still alive, and was indeed thriving. It had changed 
 its name, and removed its offices, but had preserved its old 
 staff, its old objects, and its old tactics. Its aims were : 
 the destruction of landlordism, the subdivision of grass- 
 farms, and, above all, separation from England. The 
 means used to attain these ends was, rewarding its friends, 
 and signally punishing all who thwarted it. Its rewards 
 were money, power, and place. Was Mr. Trevelyan, while 
 uttering these words, thinking of the numerous places 
 which Mr. Gladstone had given to the Land League agita- 
 tors ? Its punishments were commercial ruin, social ostra- 
 cism, robbery, maimings, cardings, and death. 
 
 It was on the i5th of February that Parliament met 
 after the adjournment. On that day, Lord Salisbury 
 explained the position of affairs to the House of Peers. 
 In reading an extract from his speech, let us bear in mind 
 that the disestablishment of the Irish Protestant Church, 
 and the destruction of the Protestant landlords of Ireland, 
 were both means towards the establishment of Ireland as 
 an independent, autonomous Romanist State. Lord Salis- 
 bury said : "To a great extent, the Government of Ireland 
 " is gone. You formerly had the landowners of Ireland 
 "between you and the rest of the population. You have 
 "shattered their power, and they are now perfectly useless for 
 " the purpose of protecting the English Government or of 
 " maintaining the connection between the two countries. . . . 
 " Unfortunately, we have not had many utterances from 
 " Mr. Gladstone in this recess. His constituents in Midlo- 
 thian have, to their great grief, failed to receive a defence 
 " of his policy ; but we progress rapidly, and new ways of 
 "communication are constantly discovered by distinguished 
 " men. Mr. Gladstone, having abandoned the senate and
 
 652 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " the platform, has taken refuge behind the tea-table, and 
 " there he informs M. Clemenceau, that the ' curse of Ire- 
 111 land is centralisation.' 'We have,' he adds, 'dis- 
 "' established the Church, and have relieved the tenant 
 "'class of many grievances, and are now going to produce 
 "'a state of things which will make the humblest Irishman 
 "'realize that he is a governing agency, and that the 
 '"government is to be carried on for him and by him.' 
 " I do not like the idea of the humblest Irishman as a 
 "governing agency. What does Lord Hartington say? 
 " He says, ' It is supposed by some, that by changes in 
 " ' the system of local self-government we can restore con- 
 " ' tentment to the country. It would be madness, in my 
 '"opinion, to give Ireland more extended self-government, 
 " ' unless we can receive from the Irish people some assur- 
 "'ance that this boon would not be used for the purpose 
 " ' of agitation.' " 
 
 Lord Salisbury emphasized Mr. Gladstone's conversation 
 with M. Clemenceau, and the authenticity of it was never 
 denied. Lord Salisbury clearly expected Mr. Gladstone 
 to grant autonomy to Ireland, and gave the reasons for his 
 expectation. 
 
 The Dublin detectives, according to the Times of Feb. 
 1 8, made important discoveries : "Among the disclosures 
 " made by Carey, not the least significant is the intimate 
 " connection established between the ' Irish Invincibles,' 
 "the Land League, and the Fenians. It is now shown that 
 " the secretary of the Land League, the correspondent of 
 " the Irish World, an authoritative speaker at meetings 
 " which inflamed the fierce passions of the people and 
 " incited them to crime and outrage, Mr. Thomas Brennan, 
 "who sat at the council table with Mr. Parnell and the 
 " other leaders, was a centre of the Fenian conspiracy ; and 
 " that Mr. Sheridan, a brother councillor and trusty agent 
 " of the League, whose services Mr. Parnell promised to 
 " enlist on the side of the Government in their efforts to 
 " protect life and property, was enrolled in the assassination
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 653 
 
 " society. ... Its executive, which for a time usurped 
 " the functions of the Government, did not trouble itself 
 " about the means and instruments employed to enforce 
 " the unwritten law. It was enough for the chiefs to be 
 " able to boast that, while the law of the land was defied, 
 " theirs was implicitly obeyed ; and this was done, if not 
 " through the willing submission of the people to the regime 
 " of their de facto rulers, at least through the fear of swift 
 " and signal punishment. The League, so far from extin- 
 guishing secret societies, as its advocates professed to 
 " believe, revived and stimulated their dormant energies 
 " and brought them for the first time into effective combina- 
 " tion. ... It may be remembered that a statement 
 " which appeared in the Times before Mr. Parnell's arrest, 
 " to the effect that there was reason to believe that the 
 " Ribbon and other societies of the same character were 
 " affiliated with the League, caused a great outcry and in- 
 " dignant repudiations ; but there can be little doubt that 
 "the authorities are in possession of information to prove 
 " the connection of Ribbonism as well as Fenianism with 
 " this revolutionary movement." 
 
 James Carey was a Town Councillor of the Dublin Cor- 
 poration, a member of the Land League, a Fenian since 
 1 86 1, treasurer to the Fenian Society, and cognisant of 
 their plots. He was also an ardent and devout Roman 
 Catholic, a member of a religious confraternity, and a con- 
 stant communicant in the Jesuits' Church in Dublin. He 
 revealed the identity or close connection of the Land 
 League with the Fenians and the Ribbon Society, and left 
 it to be inferred that they all sprang from the Jesuit Society. 
 What a light did that evidence cast on the mystery called 
 " the Kilmainham Treaty," in which Mr. Gladstone was 
 the prime mover ! Carey was one of the band of assassins ; 
 and was intimate with Thomas Brennan, a Fenian chief, 
 the paid secretary of the Land League, the companion of 
 Mr. Parnell on his American tour, and the colleague of 
 Parnell, Sexton, and the rest of the Land League execu-
 
 654 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 tive. Another Land League organizer was P. J. Sheridan, 
 who was concerned in spreading the assassination organi- 
 zation in the provinces, and, with that object, went about 
 in the garb of a priest. He too was on the executive of 
 the Land League ; and his services were offered to, and 
 accepted by the Government, at the time of the Kilmain- 
 ham Treaty ! But the most important revelation of all was 
 that Fenianism, Ribbonism, the Land League, and the 
 " Irish Invincibles," were branches growing out of one stem, 
 and springing from one diabolical root. That stem was 
 consistent with a fervent devotion in Romanism, with at- 
 tending mass every morning, with frequent confession and 
 communion, and with being a prominent member of a 
 Roman Catholic confraternity. Mr. O'Donnell, M.P., was 
 another fervent Papist. What did the Times of February 
 19 say of him ? " Among the possible ' surprises ' to which 
 "the Crown counsel alluded on Saturday, there may be 
 " other identifications of a startling kind. Mr. O'Donnell, 
 " whose prescience is remarkable in these matters, and who 
 " sounded a note of warning before the Phcenix Park 
 " tragedy, insisted so strongly last week on the danger of 
 " admitting informer's evidence, that it was impossible not 
 " to be impressed with the conviction that the secrets of 
 "the prison-house were on the point of being let loose." It 
 was also made public that Captain McCafferty, a noted 
 Fenian, was tried and convicted for the raid on Chester 
 Castle in February, 1867, and was sentenced to death. But 
 " the good-hearted Premier of England " (Lord Beacons- 
 field) had the sentence commuted into a short period of 
 penal servitude, and McCafiferty was very soon amnestied 
 with his fellows. 1 
 
 1 St. /ames's Gazette, Feb. 19, 1883.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 655 
 
 No. LXXXVII. 
 
 ON the last day of February, Frank Byrne was arrested in 
 Paris, for his complicity in the Phoenix Park assassinations. 
 The Ultramontane, or Jesuit organ, the Univers, was exas- 
 perated, as were also all the Revolutionary organs. On 
 the 4th of March, the Times said : " The moderate Re- 
 " publican National rebuked the Revolutionist organs for 
 " treating Byrne as a martyr, without waiting for his excul- 
 "pation, a doctrine under which murder entitles the 
 " murderer to canonization. The Clerical Univers insisted 
 " that Byrne was innocent." The Univers continued to 
 write in favour of Byrne. 
 
 The Voltaire, on the 3rd of March, remarked that the 
 Land Leaguers were " elegant gentlemen, but slightly 
 " tainted with religiosity. M. Egan had a priest constantly 
 " living with him, ' Brother' Sheehy, who was also affiliated 
 " to the Land League, of which he was in some sort the 
 "pontiff. . . . They are leavened with fanaticism." 
 It then quoted Mr. Egan's exposition of the policy and 
 composition of the Land League, as communicated by that 
 gentleman in the course of a conversation two years before. 
 "They (the members of the League) have a political and a 
 " religious administrative organization," were Mr. Egan's 
 concluding words. "Behind their chiefs they have their 
 "agents, their bankers, their bishops, and their priests" 
 
 In the midst of the panic occasioned by the conspiracy 
 and the murders, the voice of a Roman Catholic bishop was 
 heard from across the Irish Channel. Was it the voice of 
 one who preached " repentance and forgiveness of sins " ? 
 Was it the voice of one who said : "Love one another"? Was 
 it the voice of a peacemaker, and of one who " made men of 
 " one mind in a house " ? No ; Archbishop Croke and Dr. 
 Nulty found an ally and imitator in their brother, the Bishop 
 of Raphoe. He wrote : " The policy of the Government is 
 " evidently a policy of extermination. The easiest way of
 
 656 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " governing a people is evidently to get rid of them. The 
 " resources of a country may remain undeveloped ; but 
 " they will give less trouble in that state. Such is the 
 " policy which the Chief Secretary has built up on a four 
 " hours' visit to Glencolumkill." Nothing had ever been 
 done more calculated to exasperate the people against the 
 law, than the publications of the declarations of innocence 
 said to have been made by some of the condemned men. 
 Those declarations, it was known, were procured by the 
 influence of some of the innumerable priests or chaplains 
 who had identified themselves with the Land League, In 
 the well-known Castleisland case, the use of almost iden- 
 tical expressions in confessions, said to have been made 
 independently by the two men, revealed clearly enough 
 the prompting. Yet the poor criminals did not think that 
 they were speaking a lie at the moment they were going 
 to be hurled before the judgment seat of their Maker. 
 For, by the Roman Catholic catechism, they were taught 
 that, after confession and absolution, a man is " as innocent 
 " as the babe just born." 
 
 On the /th of March, an Irish member, named Dawson, 
 introduced a Bill for the assimilation of the Irish Franchise 
 to the English. A Bill, in other words, to confer an over- 
 whelming power on those classes in Ireland who supported 
 the Land League, who carried on the agitation, and who 
 sheltered the Moonlighters and assassinators of the " Irish 
 " Invincibles Society." That measure was supported by 
 Mr. Trevelyan, on the part of Mr. Gladstone's Government! 
 The Times, the next morning, reflected the indignation of 
 England : " The Chief Secretary yesterday announced, in 
 " the brief and broken debate on the second reading of Mr. 
 " Dawson's Irish Borough Franchise Bill, that the Ministry 
 "intended to support that measure. We presume the 
 " promised support will be of a strictly ' platonic ' cha- 
 "racter. The Government would find it difficult to justify 
 " any rearrangement of public business for the purpose of 
 " allowing this part of the Land League policy to be pushed
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 657 
 
 "forward. . . . The election of Carey as a Town 
 "Councillor of Dublin ought to be a warning against the 
 "madness of going down still deeper among the Irish 
 "masses for political mandates and ideas. . . . Can 
 "any intelligent man doubt that the reduction of the 
 "franchise in Ireland would be immediately injurious ? If 
 " this be so, is there any justification for swamping the 
 "orderly and loyal classes in a sea of passionate and 
 " ignorant antipathy to order and law ? " There seemed 
 to remain but one step more to crown the nefarious 
 conspiracy, namely, Revolution in Ireland, and separa- 
 tion from England. 
 
 The news from Paris of an tmeute on March 10 (known 
 in England on March 12), which "both the Bonapartist 
 "and the Clerical parties were doing their best to keep 
 " up," was connected in men's minds with the simmering 
 embers of rebellion in Ireland. The same fire had evidently 
 kindled both. In Paris, the " Reactionary " or Ultramon- 
 tane organs encouraged the movement, just as they were 
 also busy in rinding excuses for the Irish murderers, and 
 in encouraging the Land League agitators. In Paris, the 
 Ultramontane deputies argued in favour of the rebels ; 
 just as members of high position in Westminster excused 
 the agitators in Ireland. The emeute in Paris was on 
 March 10. On the isth of March, London was panic- 
 stricken by the attempt to blow up the Local Government 
 offices in Westminster, and to destroy the Times office in 
 Play-house Yard. The Daily Express, of Dublin, in its 
 remarks of March 19, came very near the truth : " While 
 " all eyes are angrily turned upon the Irish party, tJie person 
 " whom we believe to be chiefly responsible for tltese and such 
 " like outrages, escapes. The whole political career of Mr. 
 " Gladstone has been one standing argument to the Irish 
 " democrats that, if they would bend him to their purpose, 
 " they must have recourse to some such tactics. Mr. Glad- 
 " stone's declaration that the Clerkenwell explosion brought 
 "the land question and the Church question within a 
 
 U u
 
 658 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " measurable distance of practical politics, has been ever 
 " since the charter and justification of all such ruffianism. 
 " He has taught, not only by his acts but by his words, 
 " that if the extreme Irish party desire his assistance in 
 " carrying out tJieir revolutionary designs, they must seek it 
 " by assassination, outrage, and diabolical wickedness. When 
 " this wickedness has reached some superlative and theatrical 
 "point, then he steps into the arena, and strikes with his 
 " legislative weapons upon the same side. This is the lesson 
 " he has taught to his Irish pupils, and they have not been 
 " slow to profit by it Thus, Mr. Gladstone has done more 
 " to foster and cherish Irish Nihilism than any promoter of 
 " disorder with whom we are acquainted, not excepting 
 " Mr. Parnell or the editor of the Irish World" 
 
 Immediately after those explosions in London, by the 
 Irish gang, Dr. Croke, the Archbishop of Cashel, with 
 characteristic haste, at once (on March 19) wrote to the 
 Freeman s Journal, enclosing ^50 for the " Parnell Testi- 
 " monial Fund," and announcing that the list of subscribers 
 to that fund would be a correct test of loyalty to the 
 Irish " National " party. The Roman Catholic Bishop 
 of Limerick, Dr. Butler, did the same. Archbishop 
 Croke followed up his letter by ordering a collection 
 to be made in all the churches of the Sees of Cashel 
 and Emly for the Parnell Testimonial Fund. 1 Cardinal 
 McCloskey, in the United States, proved to be much of 
 the same kidney ; for he graciously received Sullivan, the 
 president of the Irish National League, and expressed his 
 approval of the proceedings of the Philadelphia Conven- 
 tion. Such, indeed, were nearly all the Roman Catholic 
 prelates. On the i/th of March, those bishops published 
 a correspondence with the Lord Lieutenant, on the distress 
 in Ireland ; wherein incentives to crime were mantled 
 under the cloak of charity to the poor. The Government 
 had devised a plan for assisting the poor to emigrate. The 
 bishops strenuously resisted it ; was it that they did not wish 
 1 Times, April 6.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 659 
 
 to lose the tools by which they promoted rebellion ? They 
 asked instead for loans, and pressed for out-door relief. 
 The Government demurred, and the bishops assembled 
 and passed resolutions : " That to refuse relief to house- 
 " holders and landholders, until they become inmates of a 
 " workhouse, is, in their judgment, an outrage on humanity 
 " and a violation of one of the first duties of a Govern- 
 " ment ; and they say that it is a covert, indirect system, 
 " not now used for the first time, of exterminating the 
 " native race of Ireland. As fathers and protectors of the 
 "poor, they deplored and utterly condemned the resolu- 
 " tion come to by the Government, and so heartlessly 
 " avowed in Parliament, of sweeping away from a land, 
 " by the slow but sure death process of tJte workhouse or by 
 " wholesale emigration, the labourers and small tenant 
 "class, whose holdings are judged insufficient for their 
 " entire support" Such resolutions as these, which were 
 passed by bishops, and sent broadcast through the land, 
 were sufficient of themselves to light the flames of rebel- 
 lion, were it not that fear held back those who were deaf 
 to the moral voice which should have deterred. 
 
 On March 26, the Right Hon. W. H. Smith addressed 
 a letter to the Times, in which he spoke what nearly every 
 Englishman felt : 
 
 " The Secretary of State is very angry because I con- 
 " nect 'the state of disturbance, of repression, of anxiety, 
 " ' of alarm, and of destruction of property' with a Liberal 
 " Government with the existing Government ; and he is 
 " angry, not because I said this, but because he knows very 
 " well that the great majority of the people of England 
 " are of the same mind with me. . . . 
 
 " Mr. Gladstone, some time ago, announced publicly that 
 " the Clerkenwell explosion first brought the question of 
 " the abolition of the Irish Church within the range of 
 " practical politics, and it is notorious that this declaration 
 " has been referred to over and over again, by Land League 
 " and Home Rule speakers, as a warrant for an agitation
 
 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " which is certainly inseparably connected with disturbance, 
 " anxiety, alarm, and destruction of life and property. 
 
 " Mr. Chamberlain, not long ago, declared that the Land 
 " League ought not to have been suppressed before it was, 
 " because, without its aid, the Land Act could not have 
 " been passed. 
 
 " Only last May, members of Parliament, who a few 
 " days before had been denounced by the Irish Attorney- 
 " General as 'steeped to the lips in treason,' were released 
 " from prison, in order, apparently, that their assistance 
 " might be afforded to the Government in ' tranquillising ' 
 " Ireland, and in promoting the interests of the Liberal 
 " party ; and, in order to carry out this transaction, Mr. 
 " Forster and Lord Cowper were got rid of. 
 
 " Am I very far wrong in suggesting that a policy which 
 " recognises agitation and crime as factors in politics with 
 " which it is right to deal a policy which is appealed to 
 " by the agitators themselves as a direct incentive to a fresh 
 " agitation, ' a renewal of the war ' is responsible for much 
 " of the insecurity of life and property which prevails ? . . ." 
 
 Two days afterwards, Lord Salisbury said, in a speech 
 at Birmingham : 
 
 " You know, at the first, not only that force was not 
 " effectively applied, but that the sympathies of the Govern- 
 " ment were freely given to tJie authors of disorder and con- 
 " spiracy in Ireland, Those men who contrived the Land 
 " League, those men with whom the Kilmainham Treaty 
 " was concluded, those men who were in close communica- 
 "tion with the leaders of conspiracy and assassination, and 
 " who, by credible evidence, at all events are said to have 
 " asserted that they could cause assassination to cease 
 " those men, you must never forget, had received a helping 
 " fond and a sympathetic word horn the Radical party in the 
 " Government of this country. ... By the application 
 " of a most rigorous coercion law, order has been restored. 
 " If that coercion is maintained, if there be a firm and just 
 " administration of power, if Government can be counted
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 66 1 
 
 " on, we all of us hope for the gradual improvement of the 
 "state of Ireland and the temper of the Irish people 
 " towards the Government of this country ; but yet this is 
 " certain, as the result of the policy which the Government 
 " have pursued, that tJte feeling against England in that 
 " country is deeper, more extended, more emphatic now than it 
 " has ever been since Parliamentary government began in this 
 " country. . . . The Upas-tree (of Protestant ascendency) 
 " has been cut down ; and Ireland has been governed 
 " according to Irish ideas." 
 
 At the beginning of April, the police, with great pru- 
 dence and wise abstention, succeeded in making the arrest 
 of Whitehead and many others who, with consummate 
 brutality, had devised a plot for the destruction, not of pub- 
 lic characters, but of the general public. It was proposed 
 to place, in various parts of London, in lodgings, in hotels, 
 and coffee-houses, large quantities of nitro-glycerine ; and, 
 on an appointed day and hour, the machinery was to be set 
 in motion in all those places, and the criminals were to 
 escape, while the whole of London was to be reduced to 
 ruins. The populace was panic-struck at these revelations. 
 Public opinion loudly demanded and the fire of the 
 people's indignation would brook no delay a strenuous 
 measure of suppression adequate to such enormity of 
 crime. On April 9, the Explosives Bill was hurried through 
 the two Houses of Parliament, and received the royal 
 assent on the roth. It was but one hour running through 
 all its stages in the House of Commons, and less time was 
 found necessary in the Lords. 
 
 It was instructive to observe the attitude of the Irish 
 papers on the receipt of that astounding intelligence. On 
 April 14, the Irish World said : " The dynamite scare has 
 " thrown England into a veritable spasm of terror. If the 
 " enemy be panic-stricken by one attempt at skirmishing, 
 " what will be his alarm when, not only London, but every 
 " large English city, is the scene of dozens of explosions ? 
 " The men who have resolved to fight England with
 
 662 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " dynamite, know the risks they run. They have made up 
 " their minds to incur those risks, and it is not to be sup- 
 " posed that they will be deterred by an Act of Parliament 
 " If the Government arrests every dynamite soldier on 
 " English soil, what guarantee has it that their places will 
 " not be taken by others equally fearless and resolute 
 " in self-defence ? England will be compelled to loosen 
 " her grasp on Ireland." The Nation, edited by John 
 Devoy, disclaimed sympathy with the "child's play" of 
 dynamite, which had brought contempt upon the Irish 
 race. The first duty was to send the "toyshop dynamiters" 
 about their business, and establish a central authority and 
 a general plan, to avoid random work. The question of 
 dynamite or torpedo force, as well as the method or place 
 of using them, were merely questions of expediency and 
 opportunity. " If English mobs should take to murdering 
 " our people," it said, " let the punishment be such as will 
 " startle the world, and teach a lesson that will be re- 
 " remembered for all time. If our people are butchered 
 " in England, let there be no impotent indignation meet- 
 " ings and high-sounding resolutions in America. Crimes 
 " of blood are not punished by words in any civilized com- 
 " munity. Our power of punishing murder is as boundless 
 " as the atrocity of the race that holds us down." The 
 comments of the Boston Pilot upon this point were identi- 
 cal in spirit. 
 
 The connection between the Fenians and Roman 
 Catholics was well known. Yet, when Whitehead was 
 apprehended, with the nitro-glycerine which he had manu- 
 factured in Birmingham, it was not at first suspected that 
 he was a devout Roman Catholic. Such he was, however ; 
 and his devoutness in Romanism did not interfere with 
 his ferocity in planning wholesale murders. 1 On the trial 
 of Brady, it appeared that James Carey, the Irish Invin- 
 cible, and then informer, was also a devout Roman Catholic, 
 and one of the chief officers of a religious confraternity. 
 1 St. James's Gazette, April 12.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 663 
 
 "He added, in his evidence, " The confraternity met once 
 " a month, and the rule was that the members should 
 " receive the communion once a month." He was also a 
 Fenian, and had sat on " a court-martial of the society." 
 He was also "principal paymaster of the club of assassins"; 
 and held up the white handkerchief as the signal for Mr. 
 Burke's murder in the Phoenix Park. He was also a 
 member of the Dublin Corporation ; and although he had 
 been, and was, planning a number of assassinations, he 
 twice proposed resolutions condemning the murders ; and 
 received holy communion as a devout Roman Catholic and 
 member of a religious confraternity. Brady himself, the 
 convict, was a devout Roman Catholic, 2 and was so highly 
 esteemed by the priests, that he was office-bearer in Anne 
 Street Roman Catholic Chapel, in Dublin. For nine years 
 he held that office, and made all the collections. And he 
 was an Irish Invincible ! 
 
 How was it that Roman Catholicism and assassination 
 went together ? We doubtless remember the Jesuit doc- 
 trines, so often proclaimed by Mariana, Suarez, and indeed 
 all the Casuists, that it is lawful, and even praiseworthy, to 
 remove " tyrants " ; and that all who oppose the Roman 
 Catholic religion are ipso facto tyrants ? At the trial of 
 Curley, that assassin, before sentence was passed, made a 
 speech, in which he admitted his participation in the 
 murders, and the plots to murder ; and yet he denied 
 all guilt, because " they were clean crimes." He spoke of 
 himself as an honest man, although he had admitted that 
 he was steeped in the blood of his neighbours ; and he 
 said : " I admit that I am a member of the Invincible 
 "society, unhesitatingly; no man will ever be able to point 
 "the finger of scorn at me, and say a word against my char- 
 " acter, moral or otherwise" On the trial of Timothy Kelly, 
 on April 23, Carey denied that " murder " was one of the 
 objects of the secret society of Invincibles ; he persisted 
 in calling it the " removal " of obnoxious persons ; and he 
 * Times, April 20.
 
 664 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 denominated the whole system of terrorism and murder, a 
 " warfare " ; adding, with a sardonic smile, " all is fair in 
 " love and war." At the trial of Michael Fagan, on the 
 25th, James Carey said r in the witness-box, " He was 
 " aware that there was a commandment : Thou shalt not 
 " kill ; but he did not consider the removal of tyrants was 
 " murder in this sense. He did not even consider it a sin, 
 " at the time he was engaged with the Invincibles. He 
 " simply considered it justifiable warfare." On the /th of 
 May, at the Dublin murder trials, Timothy Kelly was in 
 the dock, and James Carey gave the following evidence : 
 " The only source of regret he now experienced in regard 
 " to his connection with all this crime was, he confessed, 
 " that it had been the means of placing him in his present 
 " position. The late Chief Secretary, Mr. Forster, was, in 
 "his opinion, a decidedly obnoxious person. This was 
 " ' the most polite term ' he could call him by. ' He was 
 " ' to be removed out of town.' He would not call it 
 " slaughter removal was, in his opinion, the correct term. 
 " There were so many ways, he smilingly added, of killing 
 " a dog, besides choking him, that he would not call it 
 " murder. He would not admit that word, although he 
 " would go the length of the expression ' depriving him 
 " ' of life.' He had not yet discovered it to be a sin to be 
 " engaged in this. All was fair in warfare political war- 
 fare and it was not alone the opinion of the four on the 
 " executive of this conspiracy, but it was the opinion of 
 " the majority of their countrymen, that this removal was 
 "no sin." 
 
 On April 20, the Pope's organ, the Journal de Rome, 
 gave the following warning, in allusion to these murders, 
 which was noteworthy : " Let no one deceive himself; the 
 " discoveries, which are being made, almost daily, by the 
 " police, are but the smallest incidents (minimes details) 
 " of a gigantic action, which will burst out everywhere at 
 " once, at the appointed day and hour." 
 
 During the night before the 2Oth, the Parliament House
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 665 
 
 at Quebec was burned down by the Fenians. The same 
 day, the authorities discovered a plot to destroy Windsor 
 Castle, and other places. They also learned that the 
 armoury at Richmond was to be attacked ; as also the 
 armoury at Romford. 
 
 No. LXXXVIII. 
 
 ON April 26, 1883, the Irish Convention was held in 
 Philadelphia. Father Walsh was the treasurer. Father 
 O'Reilly reported the "platform." Father McKenna, and 
 Father Connerty, and numerous other Roman Catholic 
 priests, took part in the proceedings. Thomas Brennan 
 spoke and said : " It has created a spirit in Ireland which 
 " laughs at gaols and Coercion Acts, and which will free it 
 lf from the power of landlordism which England exercises 
 "over the country. The object of the League was to 
 "obtain the land of the country for the rightful owners, 
 "the people. The name of the League may be changed, 
 "but its object must remain the same. The war must con- 
 "tinue till every shred of landlordism has been swept out." 
 Mr. Alexander Sullivan then took up the parable : " It was 
 " the noble boast of a young patriot about to ascend the 
 "scaffold, that he wished to procure for his country the 
 "guarantee which Washington had procured for America. 
 " In the spirit in which Emmett died, we live ; in his words, 
 "we are determined to deliver our native country from the 
 "yoke of foreign and unrelenting tyranny, and to place 
 "her independence beyond the reach of any power on 
 "earth." 
 
 The objects of the " Irish National League of America," 
 were : " earnestly and actively to sustain the Irish National 
 " League in Ireland, with moral and material aid, in 
 " achieving self-government for Ireland ; ... to hurt 
 "the enemy where he will feel it most, by refusing to 
 "purchase English manufactures ; to abolish Irish sectional 
 "feeling, animosities of province and creed, and to keep
 
 666 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " alive the holy flame of Irish nationality, while performing 
 " faithfully the duties of American citizenship." 
 
 Then they "Resolved, That as the manufactures of 
 " Great Britain are the chief source of her material great- 
 " ness, already declining under the influence of American 
 "competition, we earnestly counsel our countrymen in 
 " Ireland to buy nothing in England which they can pro- 
 " duce in Ireland, or procure from America or France. 
 
 % >K He % jfc 
 
 " Resolved by the Irish- American people, in Convention 
 "assembled, That the English Government in Ireland, 
 "originating in usurpation, and perpetuated by force, 
 " having failed to discharge any duties of Government, and 
 " never having acquired the consent of the governed, has 
 "no moral right whatever to exist in Ireland ; and that it 
 "is the duty of the Irish race throughout the world to 
 " sustain the Irish people in the employment of all legiti- 
 " mate means to substitute for it national self-government. 
 
 "Resolved, That we pledge our unqualified, constant 
 "support, moral and material, to our countrymen in Ire- 
 " land, in their efforts to recover national self-government." 
 
 The New York Times and other newspapers were indig- 
 nant with the Convention, and with all the reverend 
 gentlemen who guided its deliberations, for " its failure to 
 " employ even the mildest form of censure of the deeds of 
 " violence and mischief to which certain Irishmen resorted 
 " in their attempts to secure freedom and equal rights in 
 " Ireland " ; whereby " the Convention has disappointed 
 " many whose hearty sympathies were heretofore enlisted 
 "in the struggles of the Irish people. This omission, 
 "which was clearly intentional, will have the immediate 
 " effect of creating in the public mind a suspicion," etc. 
 
 During the conspiracy of persons in high position in the 
 State, with the Jesuits and Roman Catholic dignitaries, to 
 bring about the independence of Ireland as a Roman 
 Catholic State, Russia saw that her interests lay in the 
 same direction, and was tempted to join in the conspiracy.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 667 
 
 The St. Petersburg Gazette thus sounded the preparatory 
 note: 1 "Like all the European States, Russia has been 
 " the enemy of every other country, and may be so again ; 
 " but she has only two enemies with whom she will inevit- 
 "ably have to enter into a struggle for life or death. 
 " These are Germany and England. The conflict between 
 " the Slavs and the Germans is a historical and unavoidable 
 " necessity. . . . As to the coming struggle with Eng- 
 " land, Russia should prepare herself for it by a rapproche- 
 " ment with Ireland. The United States of America were 
 " able to gain their freedom without foreign help ; and the 
 " liberation of Ireland is only a question of time. . . . 
 " Ireland's victory will be made the more certain and speedy 
 " by the fact that tJie majority in England, as well as in 
 " Ireland, will certainly demand before long the establishment 
 " of a separate national Parliament in Dublin. Whether the 
 " result will be the autonomy or the complete independence of 
 " Ireland, England zvill in either case be COMPLETELY PARA- 
 " LYSED AS REGARDS HER ACTION ABROAD. It is, therefore, 
 "undoubtedly the direct interest of Russia that Ireland 
 " should come victorious out of the struggle in which she 
 " is at present engaged. We need not openly assist her ; 
 " this would be useless, and, indeed, impossible. But it is 
 "our duty to enter into friendly relations with Ireland, which 
 " would be the more advantageous to MS inasmuch as they 
 " would improve our relations with the Catholics generally? 
 
 The policy of the Ultramontanes had been revealed 
 eight days previously in the following terms : " The isola- 
 " tion of Italy, after the occupation of Tunis by the French, 
 "raised the hopes of the Ultramontane faction at the 
 " Vatican, which has been untiring in its efforts to compel 
 " Leo XIII. to assume a hostile attitude to Italian nation- 
 " ality. The blow inflicted on Italian prestige, after the 
 " occupation of Tunis, was considered a favourable oppor- 
 tunity for initiating a campaign in favour of a Papal 
 "restoration. The simultaneous despatch to Rome of a 
 1 St. James's Gazette, April 28.
 
 668 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Russian, a Prussian, and an English representative to 
 " re-establish diplomatic relations between St. Petersburg 
 " and Berlin, and Mr. Gladstone's Cabinet and the Curia, 
 " very naturally contributed, to a great extent, to foster the 
 " hopes of the Papal partisans. Leo. XIII., who since his 
 " accession to power had wisely used a very moderate 
 " language when speaking of Italian affairs, assumed at 
 " once a violent and aggressive tone ; and the clerical 
 "journals of Rome, France, Austria, and Germany, 
 " answering to a watchword, advocated the necessity of 
 " Europe interfering in favour of at least a partial restora- 
 " tion of the temporal power. Cardinal Czaki, then the 
 " Papal Nuncio at Paris, was one of the most active pro- 
 " moters of an anti-Italian league ; and his friendship with 
 * M. Gambetta naturally aroused the suspicions of the 
 " Italian Cabinet. The situation was critical. Italy, an 
 " eminently Conservative nation, found herself abandoned 
 " by the Conservative Powers of Europe ; clerical influences 
 "provoked the Italian Irredenta movements and fostered 
 " anti-French feeling, for no other object in the world but to 
 " isolate Italy nay, to surround her by enemies? 
 
 That astute diplomatic scheme was frustrated in all save 
 one particular. Relations were for a time partially esta- 
 blished between Russia and the Vatican ; but the people 
 of England would not hear of diplomatic relations between 
 the Vatican and the Court of St. James ; so that Mr. Glad- 
 stone had to give up his part in the programme, and be 
 content with rewarding Mr. Errington with a baronetcy. 
 Above all, the alliance, offensive and defensive, between 
 Germany, Austria, and Italy, put an end, for the present, 
 to the Papal scheme. It was expressly intended by Prince 
 Bismarck to do so. 
 
 At the same time as the Convention was held in Phila- 
 delphia, the Land League agitation was revived at the 
 Ballinacurra racecourse, where priests of the names of 
 Browne, Humphreys, and Kennedy made inflammatory 
 speeches. There were also meetings at Duncannon, Co.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 669 
 
 Wexford, and at Maryborough. The Roman Catholic 
 Canon Doyle presided over the meeting at Duncannon. 
 Outrages were at the same time reported from places 
 which until that time had been absolutely crimeless. But 
 the Pope, on the nth of May, despatched an Encyclical to 
 each of the Irish bishops, in which he said : " It is there- 
 " fore the duty of all the clergy, and especially of the 
 " bishops, to curb the excited feelings of the multitude, 
 " and to take every opportunity, with timely exhortations, 
 " to recall them to the justice and moderation which are 
 " necessary in all things, that so they may not be led away 
 " by greed of gain to mistake evil for good, or to place 
 " their hopes of public prosperity in the shame of criminal 
 " acts. Hence it follows that it is not permitted to any of 
 " the clergy to depart from these rules themselves, or to 
 " take part in, or in any way promote, movements incon- 
 " sistent with prudence and with the duty of calming men's 
 " minds. ... In these circumstances it must be evident 
 " to your lordship that the collection called the ' Parnell 
 " ' Testimonial Fund ' cannot be approved by this Sacred 
 " Congregation." 
 
 The Pope might have found out, what other men had 
 before perceived, that if the Roman Catholic Church went 
 hand in hand with the revolution in Ireland, the day would 
 come when the Roman Catholic priests would have to pull 
 up ; and then the one party would hate her for having gone 
 so far, while the other party would despise her for refusing 
 to go further. On the 2jrd, an acute politician in an official 
 position wrote from Rome : " His Holiness, following the 
 " example set him from Downing Street, has waited too 
 " long ; nor do I think the form of the letter a very happy 
 "one. . . . The letter should have condemned the 
 " political action of the bishops and priests, and forbidden 
 "all collections save for religious purposes. Instead of 
 " this, it singled out Parnell, and pointed at his subscrip- 
 " tions, and gave life to what was dead or dying. Parnell 
 " has gained in money," etc. Again, on the 2Qth of May :
 
 6;o RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " I remember very distinctly that you made to me (at the 
 "end of 1874) the observation you wrote to Father - ; 
 " viz., ' The day will come when the revolution will go 
 " ' further than you dare to go ; then some will despise 
 " 'you, because you advance no further ; while the rest will 
 " ' hate you, because you have gone so far.' " 
 
 On April 27, the world learned, through the Pope's 
 organ, the Jotirnal de Rome, that Archbishop Croke had 
 been summoned to Rome " to confer with the Pope on 
 " Irish matters." But a telegram was, on that day, sent 
 from Rome to the Times, announcing that the Pope was 
 displeased with Dr. Croke, " the leader of the revolutionary 
 " party in the Irish Church," and that the Pope had already 
 administered " sharp reprimands to him, which had re- 
 " mained unheeded ; and he had therefore been summoned 
 " to Rome ad aiidiendum verbum ; " which meant, to hear 
 a word or two from an aggrieved Holiness. On May I, 
 Dr. Croke arrived in Rome. On May n the Pope's 
 circular letter was sent off, and Dr. Croke suddenly left 
 Rome on the morning of May 12, although the Pope had 
 expressed a desire to see him again. 1 Directly afterwards, 
 we heard of Dr. Croke receiving an ovation at the Irish 
 College in Paris 2 : "The Archbishop was cheered again 
 " and again by the young men. His lordship acknow- 
 " ledged the compliment paid him, in a short, pithy speech, 
 " in which he said : ' I come back from Rome as I went 
 " ' to Rome unchangeable and unchanged ;' a sentiment 
 " which seemed to approve itself to the minds of his 
 " audience, judging by the applause with which it was 
 " received. Afterwards, Dr. Croke said that many of the 
 " statements in regard to him were false. ' They asserted,' 
 " he remarked, ' that I was received coldly at Rome, when 
 "'the fact is I was never received there more warmly in 
 " ' my life. I was not summoned to Rome ad audiendum 
 " i verbnm. I was rebuked neither by the Supreme Pontiff 
 " ' nor by any member of the College of Cardinals. In my 
 1 St. James's Gazette, May 21. - St. James's, May 21.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 671 
 
 "interview with Pope Leo, I simply explained the Irish 
 ' ' question in all its varying phases, and my explanations 
 " 'were listened to with respect.' " 
 
 On May 24, we heard that he had received another 
 ovation ; while a third was in store for him : " Archbishop 
 " Croke, on returning from Rome, was last night serenaded 
 " at his hotel, at Kingstown. Replying to an address, he 
 " said he had been summoned to Rome to give his views 
 "on the state of Ireland, and he had no reason to be 
 "dissatisfied with the result. Many reports had been 
 " spread during his absence, but they were perfectly false." 
 At Thurles he received the most significant ovation of 
 all. As a prophet is always without honour in his own 
 country, it was clear that Dr. Croke participated not at all 
 in the prophetic character nor yet in the apostolic. 
 
 On May 16, a meeting of the Land League was held to 
 consider the Pope's circular letter; when Mr. Mayne, M.P., 
 speaking as a Roman Catholic, said : that " the first article 
 " in every Irishman's creed was the independence of Ireland. 
 "They regarded the Pope as the head of the Catholic 
 " Church, and Parnell as the head of their political Church." 
 Mr. Kenny, M.P., called the Pope's letter "a shameful insult 
 "to the priests and people of Ireland, as the national 
 " movement was not divorced from their religion, but was 
 " in intimate alliance with their religion" Davitt and Mr. 
 Healy, M.P., wrote to the Lord Mayor of Dublin, express- 
 ing, in strong language, their condemnation of the Papa, 
 circular. The result of the expression of these opinions 
 was, that the Government at once rescinded the permission 
 which they had given those gentlemen, to visit Parnell and 
 Co. in prison. 
 
 The Times of May 19 announced that, as had been 
 calculated and expected, the Pope's circular had given an 
 increased impulse to the Parnell Testimonial Fund. It 
 also informed us that masses for the repose of the soul 
 of Curley, the murderer of Lord F. Cavendish and Mr. 
 Burke, had been said in the Roman Catholic churches of
 
 672 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Liverpool, while all who attended those masses wore 
 tokens of mourning. Throughout Ireland, also, the priests 
 reminded their congregations, from the altars, of the duty 
 of subscribing to the Parnell Testimonial Fund ; and after 
 mass, the priest stood by the collector at the church door 
 to receive the subscriptions from the people as they left 
 the church. That was the effect of the Papal circular. 
 Patrick Egan, the treasurer of the Land League, went 
 further, in his intimate knowledge of the Nationalists, 
 priests, and Revolutionists, and said that the Papal circular 
 was calculated to unite the Orangemen with the Papists 
 and Fenians, against their common enemy England. 1 
 The Irish newspapers made a curious revelation, which 
 astonished no one acquainted with the Jesuits' mode 
 of action. They asserted that, with the circular of 
 May n, the Pope had sent out another letter to all 
 the bishops, marked : Reservatissimo, in which he gave 
 very secret instructions how they were to act ; while he 
 said that the circular of May II contained only the os- 
 tensible instructions, to beguile the Protestant people 
 of England. On May 24, at all events, the following 
 intelligence was conveyed through the Times : "The 
 " Parnell Fund now amounts to 10,195 43. 2d. Further 
 " contributions ' from the priests and people ' of different 
 "places are acknowledged to-day. It might be supposed, 
 " from such acknowledgment, that the circular is a dead 
 " letter ; but this would be inconsistent with the practice of 
 " submission to authority in the Church and the declara- 
 " tions made as to the document itself, that the bishops 
 " would subordinate their work to that of the sovereign 
 " Pontiff. There is no hurry to testify their humility ana 
 "obedience, as on other occasions, when similar communica- 
 " tions were addressed to them ; and it is a remarkable fact, 
 " that none of the prelates, whose names appear upon the 
 "committee for collecting the fund, have written to have 
 " them withdrawn" 
 
 1 Standard, May 22, 1883.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 673 
 
 If the prelates and priests were submissive and obedient 
 to the Pope's commands, His Holiness' real commands 
 must have been contained in a secret circular, while the 
 one that was published was but a cloak and pretext. On 
 the 1 3th of November, a letter from Rome, which appeared 
 in the Times, informed us that, when it was supposed that 
 the Parnell Testimonial Fund was condemned by the Pope, 
 it amounted to only 5 ,000. At the begining of Novem- 
 ber it was ^"30,000. The writer added : " The Irish 
 " bishops and priests, with few exceptions, now patronise 
 " the Parnellite candidates, and promote the establishment 
 " of branches of the Irish National League. That rebel- 
 " lion in Ireland is not foreign to the views of the Leaguers, 
 " is evident from the language of the speakers at public 
 " meetings of the League." 
 
 No. LXXXIX. 
 
 THE Times of August 20, 1883, remarked that "the limited 
 " time which remained for completing the business of the 
 " session, has been devoted exclusively to Irish Bills," and 
 " they contain great concessions, not only political but 
 " financial." In the Tramways Bill, the Government 
 " waived their own fixed principle, and consented to apply 
 "another principle, which has been pressed upon them." 
 By this wonderful and even outrageous attempt at con- 
 ciliation, as the Times remarked, the "Nationalists felt 
 " elated at success, and became confident in their power to 
 "obtain the full measure of their demands, by pursuing, 
 "with persistent energy, the course of action which had 
 " proved so far successful." It continued : " But this 
 " measure is not the only part of the proceedings of the 
 " House of Commons on Friday night which is regarded 
 " with satisfaction. A glimmer of Home Rule is discovered 
 " in the declaration which Mr. Chamberlain is reported to 
 " have made that : ' It is the earnest desire of the Govern- 
 "'ment that Ireland should have a larger measure of self- 
 
 X X
 
 674 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "'government; I trust that Parliament will not separate 
 " ' without giving it.' . . . That desire for local self- 
 " government is the settled passion of the Irish heart This 
 " so-called passion was, until the concessions of the last few 
 "years were made, a hopeless if not a hollow sentiment, and 
 " whatever strength and stability it may now have is entirely 
 " due to the policy adopted by successive Governments" 
 
 Lord Salisbury, on the other hand, thus explained the 
 position of affairs at Reading, on October 30 : "I am told 
 " that such a strange coincidence of opinion threatens to 
 " happen again, and that there will be an irresistible desire 
 " on the part of Mr. Parnell to vote for the Government in 
 " all critical divisions ; and, on the other side, by a strange 
 " coincidence, there will be an irresistible desire on the part 
 "of the Government to yield a portion of Home Rule to 
 " Mr. Parnell. But this portion of Home Rule, if rumour 
 " is correct, will be ingeniously veiled. It will be called a 
 "system of county government. You will observe that if the 
 "power of taxation and of local government is conceded 
 " to those who are hostile to the connection with England, 
 "it requires no great foresight to predict that the time 
 " must come when the pressure of their action, as against 
 " those with whom they differ in their own country, and as 
 " against the Government of England, will make the rela- 
 " tions between the two countries almost intolerable, and, 
 " at all events, will give enormous advantage to the clamour 
 " for Home Rule. ... I look upon the matter with some 
 "apprehension, because / do not know who it is that is 
 "governing us in this matter. I know that Lord Hartington 
 " has said that it would be madness madness, mind to 
 "give an extension of local government to Ireland, until 
 " Ireland has given pledges that she would not use it to 
 " weaken the connection between her and this country." 
 
 That same evening there was published a letter of 
 Michael Davitt to the Canadians, dated September 15 
 suggesting to them the propriety of not allowing the 
 Governor-General (Lord Lansdowne) to "come back to
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 675 
 
 " Erin in a hurry." The same evening, also, there occurred 
 
 eight p.m, the explosions, by dynamite, on two parts 
 
 Underground Railway. These were warnings to a 
 
 eluctant British nation that, if they should refuse to o- ran t 
 
 utmost demands of the Irish, London would be 
 
 wrecked, and a destructive panic caused in all our o- rea t 
 
 towns. The Times of < All Saints' Day " aptly expressed 
 
 dignation of the English people: "The <milt of 
 
 | agrarian or political murder, deep as it is, pales beside 
 
 e cruelty and baseness of attempts to strike terror into 
 
 a nation by spreading indiscriminate ruin among masses 
 
 "of innocent and irresponsible people." 
 
 More intimately connected with that subject than ap- 
 peared on the surface, was the announcement, on Nov 8 
 83, that Cardinal McCabe and the Irish bishops had 
 "handed over to the Jesuit body the direction of the 
 Catholic University in Stephen's Green," which was to be 
 re-opened under their control on the succeeding Monday 
 -he notice continued : "Some of the most eminent Jesuits 
 "in Ireland will be associated with the college, the teaching 
 f which will be of a decidedly NATIONAL character." It 
 be remembered that Mr. Forster, in the previous 
 August, stated that "the Government intend to encourage 
 the training, by help of Government money, of the Roman 
 Catholic teachers, even though the training will have to 
 conducted, to a great extent, under the superin- 
 sndence of the Roman Catholic clergy and bishops " 
 Would you know the effect of that teaching? Bear in 
 nmd the advice of the Jesuit Rector to a Conservative 
 member of Parliament, to make the amnesty of the Fenian 
 prisoners part of his platform. Consider also the meaning 
 of this remarkable fact, which occurred on Nov. 25 : " A*t 
 ' St. George's Cathedral, Southwark, and at all, or very 
 "nearly all, the Roman Catholic churches in London 
 " masses were said for the repose of the souls of Allen,' 
 ' Larkin, and O'Brien, who were executed at Manchester on 
 the 23rd of November, 1867, for complicity in the murder
 
 676 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "of Sergeant Brett, during the rescue of the Fenian leaders 
 " Kelly and Deasy from the police van. Masses were 
 " offered in several Roman Catholic churches throughout 
 "the country with the same object." Or consider the 
 character of the riots at Wexford : 1 " A mob attacked the 
 " theatre, where an evangelistic service had been held. 
 " They broke open the door, burned the Bibles and all the 
 " other books, and attempted to burn the building. They 
 " then took possession of the town, wrecking two Protes- 
 " tant churches and a Methodist chapel, and breaking the 
 " windows of the houses of nearly all the Protestant in- 
 " habitants. Women, who attended the meeting, had their 
 " dresses torn off, and men were beaten and stoned, several 
 "being severely wounded. The Protestant shopkeepers 
 "were also boycotted." The "serious riots" at Newry, on 
 Dec. 2, bore the same character : " Mobs paraded the 
 "streets, stoning and otherwise maltreating Protestants. 
 "One man was stabbed, and several persons were badly 
 " cut about the head. Many windows were smashed, and 
 " the disturbance continued till a late hour." 
 
 That the Government were not averse to such proceed- 
 ings, appeared from the account of the rival meetings, 
 Nationalist and Loyalist, at Dromore, County Fer- 
 managh, in the Times of Jan. I, 1884. "The protest, 
 "registered in the names of 10,000 or 12,000 yeomen of 
 "the premier province, against any attempt to foist the 
 "doctrines of the self-styled Nationalists on the men of 
 " Ulster, is emphatic and unmistakable ; nay, more, it 
 " carries with it the warning that a feeble and vacillating 
 " Government may connive at an objectionable policy being 
 "carried to dangerous extremes. Most men who believe 
 " in equal justice for all, will say with good reason that 
 " the Government are openly coquetting with the Irish agitators 
 " when they suppress a loyal procession in Derry, and not 
 " only sanction, but send vast forces of troops to protect, a 
 " disloyal meeting in Tyrone." 
 
 1 St. James's Gazette, Dec. 3, 1883.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 677 
 
 The Hon. Col. Knox took the chair at the Loyalist 
 meeting, and said: "Lord Spencer, the Lord Lieutenant 
 "of Ireland, allowed sedition on the hill opposite, where 
 "a meeting was announced simply to allow the member 
 " for the county, Mr. Biggar, to speak. Why did the Lord 
 " Lieutenant allow sedition in Dromore, while not allowing: 
 
 o 
 
 " it in other places ? Again, at Derry, when the peaceable 
 "apprentice boys and Protestants met together the other 
 " day to attend the worship of their God and to celebrate 
 " the shutting of the gates, they were prevented. . . . 
 " They should remember that Mr. Gladstone told them he 
 " would cut down tJie Upas-tree of Protestantism. He had 
 " fulfilled part of his promise, and he was carrying it out 
 " further in trying to reduce the franchise, so as to hand 
 " over the Loyalists body and soul to the rebels." 
 
 The result of the rival meetings on the first day of the 
 New Year, was " serious disturbances." There were in the 
 town one thousand soldiers, and police innumerable, and, 
 " in addition, detachments of infantry and cavalry. Police 
 "were also stationed at various points in the county." 
 Nevertheless, a collision took place between the rival 
 parties. The " Hussars and Lancers " obeyed their orders 
 and charged the Loyalists, "wounding several. 
 "Three Nationalists were arrested for having arms, and 
 "were afterwards discharged." The police also wounded 
 " two Protestants," and the police " were blamed for using 
 " such violence." But they were under orders, and obeyed 
 the commands of the Government. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone's " remedial legislation," and his numerous 
 concessions to the Roman Catholics, and his ruining of the 
 Protestant landlords, did not, then, after all, pacify Ireland. 
 We passed his Land Bill, because he urged that no price 
 was too great to pay for a contented, happy, peaceful, and 
 loyal Ireland. But where is the content? where the 
 happiness and peace? where the loyalty? Are Phcenix 
 Park murders, and riots at Wexford, Newry, and Dromore 
 the signs thereof? If more than a thousand soldiers,
 
 678 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 besides outlying detachments of infantry and cavalry, and 
 numerous police, were unable to prevent a collision, was 
 Ireland peaceful? or was it in a state of civil war? If the 
 Legislature had known that this would have been the 
 result, would they have agreed to Mr. Gladstone's " reme- 
 " dial legislation " ? No ; and, as the St. James's Gazette 
 remarked : these facts " proved that the persuasions and 
 " prophecies, by which Mr. Gladstone moved an unwilling 
 " Legislature to pass his Land Bills, were either senseless 
 "or insincere. . . . The argument is, that a man of 
 " Mr. Gladstone's genius could never be so grossly mistaken 
 " as our theory would make him out to have been ; while 
 " it does happen that men of his kind of genius do sometimes 
 " think themselves entitled to use a little guile" The guile, 
 on that occasion, resulted in the spoliation of the Pro- 
 testant landlords, according to Tyrconnel's programme. 
 But what shall we say of the guile which " openly coquetted 
 " with the Irish agitators, when the Government suppressed 
 " a loyal procession in Derry, and sent strong bodies of 
 " troops to protect a disloyal meeting in Tyrone " ? Was 
 not that a guile which pandered to the men who were 
 designated in the House of Commons, by a law-officer of 
 the Crown, as " the associates of murder, and steeped to the 
 " lips in treason " ? For a century we have had experience 
 of concessions made to the Irish Romanists. Pitt's conces- 
 sion to them, to form volunteer corps, was rewarded by the 
 rebellion of 1798, as a direct result. Then there was an 
 agitation for some years, which, in 1829, ended in the 
 grant of " Catholic Emancipation." That naturally led to 
 O'Connell's agitation for the repeal of the Union of Ireland 
 and England. The sweeping concessions of Mr. Gladstone 
 have led to what ? Not to content and loyalty. While 
 the unhappy agreement of Mr. Gladstone and Lord Salis- 
 bury, to increase the Parnellite party to ninety members, 
 will lead, most probably, to the loss of Ireland, and the 
 creation of a hostile bulwark on the flank of England. 
 The Pope identified himself with the aggressive move-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 679 
 
 ment of the Repealers in Ireland. A telegram from Rome 
 on January 7, 1884, in the Times, gave the following in- 
 telligence : " Canon Brosnan, the parish priest of Cahir- 
 " civeen, in Ireland, the birth-place of Daniel O'Connell, 
 " who has raised a considerable sum of money, with the 
 " object of erecting a church dedicated to the Holy Cross 
 " and in commemoration of O'Connell's services to Ireland, 
 "was recently received in audience by the Pope. His 
 " Holiness, it is said, warmly praised the project, and spoke 
 <; very highly of the great agitator, whom he had seen at a 
 "sitting of the House of Commons in 1848. It is further 
 " reported that the Pope subsequently transmitted to Canon 
 " Brosnan his written approval and benediction of the work 
 "he had undertaken, and alluded to O'Connell as ' Re- 
 " ' ligionis CatJioliccE strenuus vindex.' His Holiness, more- 
 " over, it is said, gave his blessing to all the contributors to 
 " the fund for the building of the church, promising himself 
 " to furnish the first stone and to depute the Archbishop of 
 " Cashel to perform the ceremony of laying it." 
 
 On the same day, Davitt received an Address from the 
 Mayor, Aldermen, and Town Councillors of Newport, 
 County Tipperary, in which they promised to use every 
 effort to obtain independence for Ireland. Davitt said in 
 reply that the work of his life had been " to end a detest- 
 '' able alien rule in Ireland, and make Ireland the mistress 
 " of her own destinies." At Clonmel, he asked : " What 
 " do we mean by self-government for Ireland ? Laws made 
 " in Ireland by Irishmen for Irishmen ; laws made to be 
 " observed, and not to be despised or condemned." That 
 was the aim of Davitt, the right-hand man of Parnell ; and 
 such, too, was the ultimate end of Parnell and the Irish 
 party, as it has been, for two centuries, the aim of the 
 Jesuit Society. 
 
 On the I4th of January, 1884, the Philadelphia Times 
 reported an interview with Monsignor Corcoran, who had 
 just returned from Rome, and said that " Mr. Parnell was 
 " regarded without any disfavour at Rome ; and that it was
 
 6So RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " well understood that the Pope's circular had been intended 
 " solely for the clergy." The Pope's newspaper, the Journal 
 deRome, of December 7, 1883, had gone further ; for, quoting 
 from the United Irishman without a word of reprobation, 
 it said : " Our friends in London are requested to furnish 
 " us with the names and addresses, as well as biographies, 
 " of the jury empanelled to try O'Donnell (the murderer of 
 " Carey), so that we may be in a position to prepare their 
 " obituary notices ! " 
 
 Is it not very manifest that the whole evil has sprung from 
 the Romanist system ? The murderers have been taught 
 to regard themselves as heroes, who were fighting for the 
 independence of their country, some of whom were wounded 
 and fell in the struggle. Whenever a landlord or an official 
 of the Government was killed, they exulted in what they 
 deemed the success of a righteous act ; the " removal " of 
 a tyrant. Any other murder, or any other crime, was 
 similarly rejoiced in ; and the murderer, having gone to 
 confession and received absolution, died with a lie in his 
 mouth, vowing that he was " innocent of the crime." In 
 the middle of January, 1884, Lord Allington touched upon 
 this fact in his speech at Dorchester. He said that " the 
 " murderers of Lord Frederick Cavendish and Mr. Burke 
 " said, ' We have nothing to ask forgiveness for. You Eng- 
 " ' lish people send your soldiers into the field, and they die 
 " ' in battle, and you call them heroes. We consider you 
 " ' tyrants, and we die for our country, and have nothing to 
 " ' ask forgiveness for.' Now mark this ; if this sentiment 
 " were confined to those four men, it would not signify ; 
 " but I know, and Her Majesty's Government know, at this 
 " moment, there are tens and hundreds of thousands who 
 " are imbued with these feelings, and who would to-morrow 
 " hear with exultation of the murder of another represen- 
 " tative of the Queen's Government in Ireland. I ask if 
 " these people are to be trusted ? Is it right at this 
 " moment to lower the franchise in Ireland ? "
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 68 r 
 
 NO. XC. 
 
 AT the beginning of March, 1884, the Times admitted 
 that, in Ireland, there were " no buyers of land, either in 
 " the Landed Estates Court, or by private contract." No 
 capitalist would invest in a security which was continual]y 
 threatened with unjust interference. Lord Devon's liberal 
 offer proved that the tenants would not come forward to 
 buy land which they were taught to believe they would 
 soon have for nothing. Davitt told them not to buy, even 
 when the landlords should come to them, hat in hand, 
 begging of them to take the land on their own terms ; and 
 he promised them that when the Democracy should have 
 the power, which they would under the promised Reform 
 Bill, they would have it all their own way. The result of 
 this was that the landlords were grievously impoverished ; 
 their land was unsaleable; while the tenant's interest in 
 the land was continually rising in value. The tenant's 
 interest in farms sold for 26 years' purchase, and in some 
 cases as high as 35 years' purchase of the rent; while the 
 fee-simple would not bring, to the landlord, 1 1 years' pur- 
 chase. That was the result of a measure which Ministers 
 had declared would not injure the property of the landlord ! 
 Yet it was openly proclaimed, on March 7, that the party 
 of Parnell were preparing for another great agitation in 
 Ireland, in order to reopen the land question ! 
 
 We imagined that Mr. Gladstone was fully cognisant of 
 the move. The Rev. Father Hogan, Professor of Theology 
 at St. Sulpice, declared that "Mr. Gladstone has promised 
 " this much (Home Rule), and he is engaged on further 
 "plans, which are to work in the same direction." He also 
 counted on Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Trevelyan, as well 
 as Mr. Gladstone, as " friends of Ireland." * Tynan, the 
 famous "No i," made also the following statement. 2 
 
 1 Times, April 21, 1884. 
 
 2 St. James's Gazette, April 28.
 
 682 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " Behind me there is a force, before which England will one 
 " day tremble. There are men, in our movement, of high 
 "position, intellectually as well as socially, conspirators whose 
 " left hands ivill not know what their right hands are doing ; 
 " and daring soldiers, who are prepared to lay down their 
 " lives chivalrously for the cause of the Fatherland." 
 
 At the close of the sitting of May 27, 1 884, Mr. Trevelyan, 
 the Chief Secretary for Ireland, laid upon the Table, his 
 scheme for the purchase, by the tenants, of the lands of 
 Ireland. The annual sales in the Landed Estates Court 
 from 1859 to 1879, averaged 1,5 00,000. The average 
 annual sales of 1881, 1882, and 1883, were 250,000, of 
 which a large proportion was urban property, outside the 
 operation of the Land Act ; and the Chief Secretary said 
 that three such years worked as wide a ruin as there was in 
 1849. The Land Commissioners, Mr. Trevelyan proposed, 
 shall in each case satisfy themselves that " the price is 
 ' fair," and that " the transaction is one which will benefit 
 "the tenant? Yet one of the Commissioners, Mr. Grayj 
 had said, at a public meeting r 1 "If Griffith's valuation of 
 " a farm be 2os. an acre, and the taxes 3^., then 8.y. 6d. 
 " would be a fair rent." That is to say, substract the 
 amount of taxes from Griffith's valuation, and halve the 
 remainder to find the fair rent ! It was, presumedly, on 
 that principle that the Commissioners had reduced a rent 
 of 23 \6s. $d. to 13 15-y. ; and 13 5-y. to 4 los. ; and 
 42 9.?. lod. to 29. There was also another principle on 
 which they always acted : they always reduced rents by 
 about 25 per cent, whether they were high or low. Yet 
 Michael Davitt published a Declaration, which appeared 
 in the Times of June 3, in which he said : " Landlordism is 
 " not yet abolished not by a long way. Some hundreds 
 " of landlords have been impoverished, it is true ; a few 
 " hundreds more are threatened with bankruptcy ; and these, 
 " with others who are heavily encumbered, are agitating 
 " for laws which will enable them to sell portions of their 
 1 Times, June 2.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 683 
 
 "estates to the tenants thereon ; but not more than 50 per 
 " cent, of the landlords have suffered more than a 20 per 
 " cent, reduction of rack-rents, while but one estate in the 
 ' whole of Ireland has yet been disposed of to the tenants 
 " as a direct result of the land agitation." 
 
 On June 8, the Nationalist party proposed to hold a 
 "demonstration," or meeting, in Newry ; and the Loyalists 
 intended to make a counter demonstration. On June 7, 
 the Lord Lieutenant issued a proclamation prohibiting the 
 Loyalist demonstration, but not forbidding the Nationalist 
 meeting, to the great delight and triumph of the rebels. 
 Nevertheless, a riot took place after the meeting. The 
 Nationalists threw stones at the Orange Hall, and the 
 Orangemen retaliated. The police interfered for the pro- 
 tection of the Nationalist procession. In half an hour the 
 procession returned, and, in passing the Orange Hall, a 
 priest, who was in a break, stood up and made gestures, 
 when volleys of stones were thrown at the Hall, breaking 
 every window in it, and wounding many persons inside. 
 Some shots were then fired by the processionists, and 
 replied to from the Hall ; then the police burst into the 
 Hall and made sixty-seven arrests ; while, to maintain the 
 appearance of impartiality, they took up two Nationalists. 
 But the police had to obey the orders of the Government. 
 
 On the i6th of June, the Duke of Argyll raised a debate 
 on the Land Act, in the House of Lords, which he did, as 
 usual, in a speech of logical argument and powerful elo- 
 quence, delivered in his very effective manner. Lord Car- 
 lingford admitted that the position of affairs was intolerable; 
 and it was shown that, while the Irish farmer had improved 
 from 1849 to 1869, he was annually and daily becoming 
 less prosperous and less improved from 1870, the date of 
 Mr. Gladstone's first Land Act ; the acreage under crops 
 had diminished, and the numbers of live stock had fallen 
 off. Landlords, who had been deprived of the major part 
 of their interest in their estates, had ceased to effect im- 
 provements ; and the tenants had done absolutely nothing
 
 684 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 to supply the want. The incomes of the landlords had 
 been seriously reduced, while the price of the tenant-right 
 had risen enormously. Occupancy was at its full value, 
 ownership was destroyed, and capital fled. Worse than 
 all, according to the Duke of Argyll, "the fundamental 
 "ideas of property had been uprooted from the minds of 
 " men." 
 
 Nevertheless, at the beginning of August, we learned 
 from the Times 1 that almost all the Roman Catholic pre- 
 lates had given in their adhesion to the Land League. 
 In France, Ultramontanism kept alive the feelings of re- 
 venge against Germany, while it strove to unite France to 
 Spain. In Austria, it took the part of Slavism against the 
 Empire. In Prussian Poland, it excited rebellion. In 
 Alsace-Lorraine, it worked hard to prevent union with 
 Germany. In Germany, it fomented anti-national aims, 
 under pretence of protecting the Roman Catholic " con- 
 "science." The Kulturkampf was Prince Bismarck's attempt 
 to stamp out Ultramontanism ; so the Roman Catholic 
 Archbishop of Tuam trumped up some evidence against 
 the finding of the jury, the decision of the judge, and the 
 judgment of all honest men in the Maamtrasna case, by 
 means of a public declaration extorted from two of the 
 witnesses, Thomas Casey and Philbin, that they had sworn 
 falsely at the trial ; and the Archbishop, in an address 
 from the steps of the altar, assumed the truth of the state- 
 ments of men who had professed themselves to be perjurers. 
 As Myles Joyce had been hung, what other object could 
 he have had, than to discredit the administration of justice, 
 and overturn the Government in Ireland ? The Lord Lieu- 
 tenant furnished the Archbishop with overwhelming evi- 
 dence of the falsehood of the extorted statements of Casey 
 and Philbin, and yet the Archbishop persisted in his de- 
 mand for a new inquiry and for ripping up the whole case. 3 
 According to the Times, " this trumped-up story was a part 
 " of a determined plot to discredit the administration of 
 1 August II. 2 Times, Aug. 26.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 685 
 
 "justice throughout Ireland. The men who are organizing 
 "and working that plot, are men who stick at nothing. 
 " They will compass their end if they can ; the means do 
 "not matter. They wish to ruin the reputation of one 
 " official after another." Yes ; because they are those who 
 hold the principles that the end justifies the means ; and 
 that every end is good which is done for the glorification 
 or magnification of the Roman Catholic Church. 
 
 On September 25, we learned that similar attempts were 
 being made to discredit other trials. A number of priests 
 of Westmeath published a declaration of Patrick Cole, a 
 witness in the trial of the Barbavilla tragedy, that he too 
 had perjured himself. The object was to inspire a general 
 disbelief in the forms of English justice, and to reconstitute 
 the bishops and priests as judges even in civil affairs. In 
 December, 1 a curious confirmation of this conclusion was 
 given in the House of Commons. 
 
 " Mr. Onslow asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord 
 " Lieutenant of Ireland, was it true that there were parties 
 " who were not acting in accordance with the principles 
 "and doctrines of the National League called up before 
 " the committees of branches of that association at Timahoe, 
 " and other places in Queen's County, when the Rev. Mr. 
 " Phelan, P.P., and Messrs Dugin and Ryan, C.C.'s, were 
 " the presiding members ; were these parties interrogated 
 " by those gentlemen and others as to their connection and 
 " dealings with landlords and persons in charge of farms 
 " from which persons had been evicted, and made to promise 
 " through fear that they would cease to have anything to do 
 " or say with them for the future ; if such courts had been 
 " held, had the facts been reported and brought under the 
 " notice of the Government or their law officers ; and, if so, 
 " had any proceedings been instituted against the offending 
 " parties ; and was it the fact that the Rev. Mr. Ryan, at 
 " Timahoe, had been previously moved by his bishop from 
 " the County Carlow to his present parish, on representa- 
 1 December i, 1884.
 
 686 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 "tions made by the authorities as to his acts and conduct 
 "in connection with certain landlords in that county ? " 
 
 Mr. Campbell-Bannerman : " It is believed that persons 
 "who had acted in a way obnoxious to the National 
 " League, have been summoned before branches or com- 
 " mittees of that body at Timahoe and elsewhere, and that 
 " one, at least, of the clergymen named in the question has 
 " presided on such occasions, when the persons summoned 
 " were interrogated, and subjected to intimidation, and 
 " forced to give promises of the kind indicated by the 
 " hon. member. Reports to this effect have been made 
 " to the Government, and accounts of these proceedings 
 " have been published in local newspapers which are the 
 " organs of the National League." 
 
 The Rev. Michael Duggan, a Romish priest of the County 
 Kerry, had curious ideas of his judicial capacity, 1 which 
 seems to have been very general among the priests of 
 Ireland. At one of these National League courts he said, 
 as president : " He would not recommend any honest, up- 
 " right man to be a bailiff or a local agent, because the 
 " spirit of the times was now such that any honest, upright 
 " man would not look apathetically and see his neighbours 
 " and his fellow-countrymen downtrodden and walked upon. 
 " He could not, of course, recommend them to boycott 
 " them, because the Crimes Act was in being now ; but 
 " he would tell them what they could do they were not 
 " bound to walk with them or to marry them but he 
 " would tell them that they were bound in charity they 
 " were bound to bury them'' 
 
 An awful suggestion was contained in the last words : 
 " they were bound to bury them." Similar to that was 
 Mr. Parnell's attitude very soon after the devastating ex- 
 plosions which occurred in the House of Commons and 
 Westminster Hall on January 25, 1885. Speaking at 
 Miltovvn Malbay, in Clare, on January 27, when he must 
 have been informed of the occurrences by the Dublin 
 ' Times, November 29.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 687 
 
 papers, Mr. Parnell had not a word of reprobation for 
 those dynamite outrages. But he could harangue about 
 " the most vicious, cowardly, and cruel system of misrule 
 " under which a country has ever laboured " ; by which he 
 denoted the British Government. Then he perorated thus: 
 " During many centuries, you have baffled and defeated 
 " the attempts of the English enemy to drive you from the 
 " soil of sacred Ireland, and I believe that it is for you and 
 " the men of this west coast of our country, to show such 
 " an example to the Irish race as will enable us to stand 
 " shoulder to shoulder, to march from the west to the east, 
 " and to recover, inch by inch, slowly but surely, every 
 " rood of land which has been robbed from us." 
 
 One of Mr. Parnell's lieutenants, Mr. W. Redmond, M.P., 
 uttered at Newtown Barry, on Feb. 3, 1885, words which 
 clearly manifested the spirit and intentions of the party : 
 " One of the principal rules of the Land League and if 
 "that rule was broken that agitation could not possibly 
 " succeed was boycotting. He said, boycott any man who 
 " was false to the League ; but above all, boycott without 
 " fear, withoiit mercy, that man who grabbed the land from 
 " which people had been unjustly evicted. I tell you, if you 
 " do not put down land-grabbing, you may cease this agi- 
 " tation altogether. If you do not put down land-grabbing, 
 " you will have landlordism in Ireland for time eternal, as 
 " long as Ireland lasts. But, on the contrary, if you put 
 "down land-grabbing, by boycotting the man who takes 
 " the evicted farm, you will be striking the greatest blow at 
 " landlordism in your power. Therefore I ask you, in the 
 " name of God, to put down land-grabbing in this district." 
 
 To that party, in the previous autumn, Archbishop 
 Croke and the Romanist bishops of Ireland formally, 
 by resolution unanimously carried, entrusted the question 
 of Roman Catholic education ! For that party, the Papal 
 organ, the Moniteur de Rome, sacrificed its principles to 
 offer apologies. On that party, and Parnell its leader, the 
 Moniteur de Rome could only write in words of praise.
 
 688 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Portions of Parnell's speeches were reproduced, and it 
 openly approved of the passages which advocated the 
 separation of Ireland from England. In the year 1885, 
 indeed, Mr. Parnell spoke with the Franchise Act at his 
 back ; and he shrank not from admitting that his march 
 lay " through rapine to dismemberment." He knew that 
 Mr. Gladstone, by the Franchise Act, had annihilated the 
 power of the middle classes, as that of the landlords had 
 been destroyed by the Ballot Act, and still more by the 
 Land Act. He was aware that the representation of 
 Ireland had, by statute, been vested in himself, and his 
 allies the priests. He was conscious that the spirit of the 
 Land League was still alive ; and therefore he could 
 openly speak of rapine and dismemberment 
 
 The Pope and Roman Catholic Hierarchy fully supported 
 him in his views. If any sign of that were wanting, it was 
 furnished in the fact that, on Feb. 8, Michael Davitt was 
 assigned a prominent place in the Sixtine Chapel, during 
 the requiem mass for the repose of the soul of Pius IX., (for 
 which tickets are scarcely ever given,) and that he received 
 marked attention from one of the Pope's Chamberlains. 
 If a reason for that conduct of the Pope is desired, it is 
 found in the Canon Law of Rome. The Bull Urbem 
 Antibarem declares that property taken by heretics from 
 Roman Catholics, whether lay or ecclesiastical, is not to be 
 protected by any covenant or prescription, but it is to be 
 restored to its original possessors. The Bull Apostolicce 
 Sedis, of Pius IX., excommunicates all who retain pro- 
 perties or revenues of the Church, or of ecclesiastical, or of 
 conventual institutions. Such claims have been fully 
 asserted by the Irish prelates. The Rev. Dr. Moriarty, 
 Bishop of Kerry, stated : " There has been no concordat 
 " ceding the property of the Catholic Church to the British 
 " Crown, or sanctioning its secularisation. The Church does 
 " not allow a statute of limitations to bar our claim. Our 
 " right is in abeyance ; it is unimpaired." J 
 1 Tablet, March 30, 1867.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 689 
 
 In addressing the German Parliament on the 5th 
 December, 1874, Prince Bismarck said that, in a conver- 
 sation which passed between the Minister of Wurtemberg 
 and the Nuncio, the latter said " The Roman Church Jtas 
 " to look to revolution as the sole means of securing her right- 
 " ful position." * 
 
 In that scheme Mr. Gladstone seems to have concurred, 
 and the Irish apparently knew it At a Land League 
 meeting on March I, Mr. W. O'Brien, M.P., the editor of 
 United Ireland, described the relations between England 
 and Ireland as " simply the relations of civil war, tempered 
 " by scarcity of fire-arms " ; and declared that : " there 
 " were half a dozen Englishmen in the Commons, for whom 
 " he and every member of the Irish party had a deep 
 " respect and a sincere respect ; and he had no hesitation in 
 "placing Mr. Gladstone first on the list" On the i/th of 
 March, " Mr. Gladstone figured on the triumphal arches of 
 " the Nationalists of Derry, playing on the uncrowned 
 " harp." At a meeting in Killarney, called by Dr. Higgins, 
 the Romanist Bishop of Kerry, to vote an address to the 
 Prince of Wales on his visit there, the Bishop extracted 
 nothing but vehement cheers for Gladstone and Parnell. 
 In May there were whispers of a secret agreement between 
 Gladstone and Parnell, and it was announced 2 that Mr. 
 Gladstone had drawn up a scheme of very extensive and 
 democratic local government for Ireland ; that is, Home 
 Rule. 
 
 No. XCI. 
 
 IT was on the ist of November, 1881, that we learned 
 with astonishment from the Times, that Mr. Errington, the 
 Home Rule member for Longford, had been sent to Rome 
 to establish diplomatic communications between the British 
 Government and the Vatican, with the hopes that the 
 
 1 Times, Dec. 7, 1874. * Standard, May 7. 
 
 Y Y
 
 690 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Pope would promote peace between the British Govern- 
 ment and the Irish people. We learned, too, that Consul 
 White had arrived in Rome, and been received in private 
 audience by Pope Leo XIII. "The conduct of a part of 
 " the Roman Catholic clergy in Ireland, during the last 
 " two years, necessitated the presence, in Rome, of a British 
 " representative." Much excitement was then aroused by 
 the mysterious telegrams, on this subject, from the Roman 
 correspondents of two leading newspapers. On the I2th 
 of November there appeared Mr. Gladstone's public denial 
 of Mr. Errington's mission. The Papal Secretary of State, 
 Cardinal Jacobini, was very indignant at the denial ; and 
 the Pope was much annoyed. The Government then ad- 
 mitted that Mr. Errington had been employed by them to 
 promote diplomatic relations between the Vatican and the 
 British Government. 1 On the iQth, information was re- 
 ceived that the preliminary stage of the negotiations was 
 past ; and that Mr. Errington was returning to England to 
 confer with Lord Granville, while the Pope would consult 
 Archbishop McCabe. 
 
 The Papal newspaper, the Voce delta Verita, then thought 
 it necessary, on November 20, to utter a warning to British 
 statesmen : " The Irish question is fraught with tempests, 
 " which must increase in number and gravity, whenever an 
 " accord with Papal Rome is deficient ; but they will be at 
 "least partially dispelled whenever that accord shall be 
 "re-established." In other words, the Pope's adherents 
 make all the difficulties in Ireland, until you do as the 
 Pope desires. So matters remained until the middle of 
 December, when Mr. Gladstone's secretary wrote a dis- 
 claimer, asserting, in Mr. Gladstone's name, that no mission 
 at all had been sent to the Vatican. Dr. Vaughan, the 
 Roman Catholic Bishop of Salford, at once indignantly 
 replied in a long and important speech, which was pub- 
 lished, in extenso, in the Pope's organ, the Journal de Rome. 
 He said : " Mr. Errington is in Rome. He has, strictly 
 1 St. James's Gazette, Nov. 17.
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION, 691 
 
 " speaking, no mission from the English Government. But 
 " he holds what is called a letter of confidence, so that he 
 " may be a medium of direct communication between the 
 " British Government and the Holy See ; without, however, 
 " any regular official position, and without salary." 
 
 Parliament met in February, 1882 ; and on the 8th, Sir 
 Henry Wolff, following in the line of Bishop Vaughan, 
 asked the Government to produce any papers relative to 
 Mr. Errington's mission. Sir Charles Dilke said that there 
 were no papers ; that Mr. Errington had not been sent 
 out by the Government, and had no appointment, and no 
 salary ; and that " there had not been in any sense a 
 " mission sent out by the Government ; " nevertheless, he 
 admitted that Mr. Errington had been a means of com- 
 munication between Lord Granville and the Vatican. Two 
 days afterwards, Sir H. Wolff asked what was the subject 
 of those communications, and whether they had been re- 
 corded, in compliance with the Constitution, so as to be 
 accessible to Parliament ? Sir C. Dilke answered : " Sir 
 " A. Paget is accredited to the King of Italy, not to the 
 " Vatican. The Pope is the head of the Roman Catholic 
 " Church, but has ceased to exercise temporal power. . . . 
 " Mr. Errington was not asked to go to Rome. He has 
 " received no appointment, and no remuneration. . . . 
 " The information could not be transmitted through Sir 
 " A. Paget ; as the Pope has an objection to intercourse 
 " with those representatives of foreign powers who are 
 " accredited to the King of Italy." Sir G. Campbell asked 
 whether the policy of abstention from intercourse with "the 
 " Ecclesiastic who lives at the Vatican," had in any way 
 been modified ? and Sir C. Dilke said : " There has been 
 "no appointment and no salary." On the i$th of Febru- 
 ary, Sir H. Wolff asked whether Lord Granville had given 
 Mr. Errington a "letter of confidence" to show to Cardinal 
 Jacobini ; and whether the Cardinal had declared himself 
 ready to confer with Mr. Errington, as the " recommended 
 " agent " of the British Government ; and whether he had
 
 692 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 been, ever since that time, the channel of communication 
 between the British Government and the Vatican ; and 
 whether, in accordance with the Constitutional practice, 
 such communications would be placed on record in the 
 Foreign Office ? Mr. Gladstone, in a very verbose and 
 confused answer, said that the communications between 
 Lord Granville and Mr. Errington " had been exclusively 
 " with reference to his being a channel or medium of in- 
 " formation. . . . The purpose has been to convey 
 "information upon subjects interesting to the Roman 
 " Catholic subjects of Her Majesty, and, as connected with 
 " them, to the public at large. That is the purpose, aim, 
 "and limit of those communications." The contrast be- 
 tween the simplicity of the questions, and the tumid, tor- 
 tuous character of the reply, was so great, that a feeling of 
 uneasiness and suspicion was engendered in the House and 
 the country. There was evidently something behind and 
 beyond the " letter of confidence " (which he admitted), 
 that Mr. Gladstone was most anxious to conceal. The 
 House and country learned that Mr. Errington was a " re- 
 " commended agent " of the British Government, and that 
 his business was to re-establish diplomatic relations with 
 the Holy See. Beyond that, all was dark and uncertain. 
 So great was the uneasiness, that a debate arose upon 
 the subject the next day, and was protracted until a late 
 hour of the night. Sir H. Wolff charged the Government 
 with an illegal conspiracy : " It was a deliberate attempt 
 "on the part of Her Majesty's Government, to conduct 
 "negotiations with the Vatican in an unconstitutional 
 " manner, and to keep those communications secret from 
 " Parliament." He further asserted that : " the first result 
 " of Mr. Errington's communications with Rome was that 
 " two secret circulars were issued from the Propaganda by 
 " Cardinal Jacobini " to the Irish bishops. It appeared 
 that, in the previous September (1881), Mr. Errington had 
 received a despatch from Cardinal Jacobini, which he 
 took with him to Lord Granville at Walmer Castle ; " there
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 693 
 
 " Mr. Errington was informed of the great difficulties that 
 " existed in establishing direct diplomatic relations with 
 " Rome ; and Lord Granville intimated that considerable pre- 
 "judice might be created with the Dissenting supporters of the 
 " Government, if direct relations with the Roman See were 
 " established. Mr. Errington communicated this to Car- 
 "dinal Jacobini, who informed him that he was willing to 
 " receive him as the recommended agent of the British 
 " Government. Then Lord Granville twice gave Mr. Erring- 
 " ton a letter recommending him in that capacity to the 
 " Holy See. . . . Mr. Errington's mission had a much 
 " more formal character than Her Majesty's Government 
 "chose to admit." A great deal of quibbling then took place, 
 on the question whether Mr. Errington's expenses had been 
 paid out of the secret service fund ; the answer of the 
 Government being always, that he had received neither 
 a salary nor remuneration from them. 
 
 In 1848 an Act had been passed to enable the Govern- 
 ment to hold relations with " the Sovereign of the Roman 
 " States," provided that no Envoy or other officer of the 
 Court of Rome should attend the Court of Her Majesty. 
 It was very necessary to pass such an Act, because the 
 Earl of Castlemaine, in the reign of King James II., was 
 tried and committed to the Tower for consenting to go as 
 an ambassador to Rome in 1687 ; and even the Lord 
 Chancellor Jeffreys regarded that step as " high treason." ] 
 Yet the Act of 1848 (i 1, 12 Viet. cap. 108) carefully avoided 
 mentioning the Bishop of Rome or Sovereign Pontiff. It 
 permitted relations only with the Sovereign of the Roman 
 States. On Oct 2, 1870, the Pope ceased to be " Sovereign 
 " of the Roman States." From that day the law which 
 committed Lord Castlemaine for high treason remained in 
 full force. In 1875, Mr. D'Israeli therefore repealed, as 
 useless and obsolete, the Act of i848. 2 
 
 The next day (Feb. 16, 1882), Lord Balfour raised the 
 
 1 State Trials, xii. 598. 
 
 2 By the Statute Law Revision Act.
 
 694 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 question in the House of Lords. He stated that one of the 
 effects of Mr. Errington's mission had been that " a Jesuit 
 " priest had beeen accredited, by the Vatican, to the Vice- 
 " roy of India (Lord Ripon)." Lord Granville said, in 
 reply, that " Mr. Errington had the whole confidence of 
 " Her Majesty's Government, and therefore was in a 
 "position to give authentic information, on matters of 
 " interest, to the Vatican." Of course the Pope's organ, 
 the Journal de Rome, of Feb. 25, alluded to these debates. 
 Sir H. Wolff was therein accused of inconsistency, because 
 " the Member for Portsmouth had passed for one of the most 
 "fervent admirers of the policy of Lord Beaconsfield. Yet it 
 " is an open secret that that great man was not only in favour 
 " of re-establishing diplomatic relations with the Holy See, 
 " but also anxious to re-establish the temporal power of the 
 " Pope. . . . However, the gist of Sir H. Wolff's speech 
 " was, not that he objected to the renewal of diplomatic 
 " relations with the Pope, nor yet to the selection of Mr. 
 " Errington for that post ; he merely found fault with the 
 " absence of any official character to mark the negotia- 
 " tions." 
 
 According to a telegram from Rome of March 13, it 
 appeared that the Pope was much annoyed at the shuffling, 
 the evasion, and the quibbling of the Government. " Of 
 " what use," asked the Pope, " was the mission of Mr. 
 " Errington, if it is to be denied ? The denial may be true 
 " in an official sense ; but they had been led to hope that 
 " the mission would be established in regular form ; and 
 " the proofs of the wish of the English Cabinet to estab- 
 " lish such a mission are in the Secretary's Office of the 
 " Vatican." 
 
 In the debate which occurred on the iSth of April, Mr. 
 Gladstone said : " The British Government has known, for 
 " a very long time, that the Pope is a great social power in 
 " every country, and perhaps in Ireland more than in any 
 " other country, where the great mass of the people are 
 " Roman Catholics ; and therefore in time of great social
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 695 
 
 " disturbance, Lord Granville desired that the Pope should 
 " be well informed as to the state of that country." That 
 was Mr. Gladstone's excuse for Mr. Errington's mission ! 
 The Pope has an enormous power as an Imperium in Im- 
 perio, and therefore we must inform him diplomatically 
 of our views and wishes ! Thereupon Cardinal Jacobini l 
 let it be known that he " would strongly object to the pub- 
 " lication of all the ideas of Irish affairs which had been 
 " exchanged between the English Government and the 
 " Holy See." There, again, was another proof that a 
 regular mission had been established. A few days after, 
 Cardinal Jacobini said that if, as the British Government 
 chose to assert, Mr. Errington had no mission, yet at least 
 " he foreshadowed a mission." l If any further proof were, 
 however, required as to the reality of his mission, it is to 
 be found in a telegram from Rome, in the Standard, dated 
 May 11, 1882: "It is within my knowledge that Mr. 
 " Errington submitted to the Vatican the secret reports 
 " on the state of Ireland, which were presented by the 
 " police to the English Government." Reports which 
 were not submitted to Parliament were sent to the Pope ! 
 On the same day the Papal newspaper, the Journal 
 de Rome, wrote : " The negotiations with England are very 
 " delicate and difficult, because the genuine statesmen who 
 " appreciate the political and moral importance, especially 
 " in the case of Ireland, of putting on an official basis the 
 "perfect accord which already exists, de facto, between the 
 " English Government and tJie Holy See, those veritable 
 "statesmen are surrounded by ultra-Protestants, who, in- 
 " deed, become fewer and fewer every year ; and by those 
 " who are indifferent towards all religions ; and these two 
 " classes make frequent interpellations in Parliament in 
 " opposition to all direct representation between Great 
 " Britain and the Holy See. . ; . Mr. Gladstone, it 
 " appears, does not dream of abandoning his post, but will 
 " try to carry out his programme, shaping it according to 
 1 Standard, April 24, 1882. * Standard, April 29.
 
 696 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " the necessities of the situation. . . . The Lega delta 
 " Democrazia perceives in the state of Ireland an announce- 
 " ment of a Federal Constitution, by which Ireland will be 
 " federated to Great Britain ; and it says that the only 
 " thing which has prevented Mr. Gladstone from introduc- 
 " ing his Federal Constitution before now, is the proverbial 
 " hatred which the English entertain for the Irish. . . . 
 " Mr. Gladstone has, however, taken the first steps towards 
 " a realization of his policy. All he has to do is to put 
 " the principal offices in the hands of Irishmen and make the 
 " Irish responsible for the conduct of their affairs. Ireland 
 " will then be quickly pacified, and the programme of Home 
 " Rule ivill be realized ; that is to say, the Federal principle 
 " realized by a process of evolution rather than by revolu- 
 " tion ; and that victory will be the crowning of the trium- 
 "phant career of Gladstone." In the spring of 1882 the 
 Vatican was perfectly well aware of Mr. Gladstone's in- 
 tention to give Home Rule to Ireland. 
 
 No. XCII. 
 
 IN spite of Mr. Errington's mission to Rome, to " afford 
 " true information to the Pope ; " or perhaps in conse- 
 quence of the establishment of that mission, Cardinal 
 Howard and Monsignor Stonor were sent to England, 
 according to the Journal de Rome, to study both the 
 Irish question and the action of the Irish bishops. On 
 the 1 3th of October, 1882, the Journal de Rome an- 
 nounced their return to Rome, after a residence of three 
 months in England, during which Cardinal Howard, 
 according to the Papal organ "treated of various ques- 
 tions with the Government of Queen Victoria ; and had 
 " various official interviews with Lord Granville, the 
 " Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He had even 
 "been received, in private audience, by Her Majesty the 
 " Queen herself." Immediately on his Eminence's return
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 
 
 to Rome, he hurried to a private audience of His Holiness 
 Pope Leo XIII. The same Papal organ announced Mr. 
 Errington's presence in Rome. Two days after (October 
 15), the same journal contained the following official 
 paragraph: "All the CatJwlic bishops of Ireland, with the 
 "exception of the Cardinal Archbishop of Dublin, have 
 "given permission to the priests in their dioceses to associate 
 " themselves with the movement inaugurated at the Dublin 
 " Mansion House, for the relief of evicted farmers ; and 
 " also to join the new League founded by Mr. Parnell and 
 "his friends. Many of the dignitaries of the Catholic 
 " Church in Ireland have been elected Presidents of the 
 " various branches of this League, and will, in this charac- 
 " ter, take part in a meeting to be shortly held in Dublin." 
 From this communique", it would appear that Cardinal 
 Howard had informed His Holiness of the sentiment of 
 the Irish clergy in favour of sedition ; and had arranged 
 with some members of the English Government, the 
 means of bringing about the legislative separation of 
 Ireland. At all events, the Pope was well pleased with the 
 result of Cardinal Howard's interviews with the English 
 Government ; for the Press Association, 1 announced that 
 the Pope had entrusted Mr. Errington with an auto- 
 graph letter to the Queen, in which letter, according 
 to the Journal de Rome of November 7, the Pope thanked 
 the Queen " ajfectueusement" Mr. Errington, we learn 
 by the Times and the Journal de Rome, was to present 
 that letter to the Queen " at a personal " audience." 
 We were also told that Mr. Errington brought, from the 
 Pope, various presents for the Queen whether relics, cru- 
 cifixes and rosaries, or not, we were not informed ; and 
 that Mr. Errington was to be back again in Rome " before 
 " Christmas." 
 
 Mr. Errington returned to Rome, to fulfil the duties of 
 his mission; and the Standard of January 3, 1883, pub- 
 lished despatches between Cardinal McCabe and Cardinal 
 1 Times t November 2.
 
 698 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 Jacobini (dated Dec. 20 and Dec. 24, 1882), agreeing that 
 the Minister of England to the Papal Court should have 
 " the same attributes as the Minister of Prussia." Cardinal 
 McCabe had afterwards to deny his despatch ; but its 
 authenticity was proved beyond question. A telegram 
 from Rome, in the Morning Post, of January 4, announced 
 that "notwithstanding official and semi-official contradic- 
 " tions, Mr. Errington arrived in Rome in time to be present 
 " at the Vatican on the first of the year, and the Papal 
 " Gendarmerie within the walls of the Vatican, in spite 
 " of Mr. Gladstone's contradictions, saluted him, when 
 " descending from his elegant brougham, as Ministro 
 " cT Inghilterra? The Moniteur de Rome, another Papal 
 organ, contained an article announcing that all the Govern- 
 ments of Europe, with the exception of Belgium alone, had 
 established relations with the Papacy. It added these 
 words : " It is truly a consoling spectacle to see Govern- 
 " ments, once so hostile as those of France, Russia, Prussia, 
 " and England, bending before this Supreme Influence (the 
 " Papacy)." The correspondent of the Morning Post 
 showed this article to " a Cardinal intimately connected 
 " with the Pope," from whom he learned that " up to the 
 " end of 1880 (i.e. while Mr. D'Israeli was Prime Minister), 
 " Cardinal Manning and Cardinal Howard had been the 
 " intermediaries between the Vatican and the English 
 "Government." In 1880, when the Italian Government 
 threatened to confiscate the College de Propaganda fide, 
 Cardinal Manning broached the subject to Lord Granville. 
 Later in the year, when the Irish bishops saw the Pope 
 and " misrepresented the state of Ireland," " Cardinal Pecci, 
 " the Pope's brother," informed the mediator that " if 
 " the English Government, instead of employing indirect 
 " agents, would appoint a semi-official one, the state of 
 " affairs in Ireland would benefit by it." That therefore was 
 done. Mr. Errington was sent, and " a secret circular was 
 " despatched by the College of the Propaganda to the 
 " bishops in Ireland, reminding them of their duty to
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 699 
 
 " abstain from interfering in political matters." The 
 Cardinal said that Mr. Errington " had ever since repre- 
 " sented, in a semi-official character, the English Govern- 
 " ment," and was delighted that " England was submitting 
 " to the Vatican ; " and the clericals held that thereby " a 
 " severe blow had been inflicted on Italian unity and inde- 
 " pendence." 
 
 The revolutionary movement in Ireland, inaugurated, 
 fostered, and blessed by archbishops and priests, resulted 
 in lessening the religious influence of the Roman Catholic 
 priesthood. The Irish had become more thoroughly anti- 
 English, and more narrowly national ; and they had also 
 become more dishonest, more criminal, and more irreligious. 
 Their intensely " national " feeling made them dislike being 
 governed from Rome, as much as being governed by 
 England. As early as October 15, 1882, Davitt addressed 
 a meeting at Edgeworthstown, and asked "whether the 
 " altered attitude in the Irish bishops had anything to do 
 "with Mr. Errington's visit to Rome? The people (he 
 " said) want no interference from abroad ; and they must 
 " show the little clique of English ecclesiastics in Rome, 
 "and Mr. Errington, that they in Ireland could read the 
 " weaving of their intrigues, and that they defy their 
 " hostility." While their nationality made them refuse to 
 be governed from Rome, their recently excited cupidity 
 and covetousness made them seek to evade paying the 
 "priests' dues." The priests in Ireland are merely peasants 
 in soutanes, and were glad of this excuse to go heart and 
 soul into the peasants' revolutionary movement. On 
 January 5, indeed, the Times printed what seemed to be 
 an official communiqu^, in which it said : "// is undoubtedly 
 " true tliat the influence of the Vatican has not been used, as 
 " it might have been, to aid in tlte suppression of lawlessness 
 " in Ireland ; and the default has, perhaps, been due, as is 
 "alleged, to the absence of proper information." Then, 
 alluding to Mr. Errington's mission, it added : " It is 
 " notorious that almost all the Roman Catholics of Ire-
 
 700 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " land except a small minority of the better classes, and 
 "some ecclesiastics of the higher grades as well as their 
 "co-religionists, of Irish origin, in this country, would view 
 " the arrangement with intense dislike." The same paper 
 contained an obscure denial of Mr. Errington's mission ; 
 and the Liberal organ, the Daily News, had a somewhat 
 more explicit denial. 
 
 But as Mr. Gladstone had just denied, most emphati- 
 cally, the very distinct and practical transaction called 
 the "Kilmainham Treaty," his confused denial in this 
 case failed to convince men's minds. This feeling of 
 scepticism was strengthened the next day (Jan. 6) by a 
 telegram from Rome, in the Morning Post, that " Mr. 
 " Errington had been clearly informed that, if the English 
 " Government, which has availed itself so far of the services 
 " of the (Roman) Church in Ireland, should publicly deny 
 " the pending negotiations, the whole matter will be ex- 
 " posed to the public, as was the case with the Belgian 
 "controversy with M. Frere Orban." What negotiations 
 were pending ? Mr. Errington was already in Rome as an 
 officious agent. What further negotiations were pending ? 
 The Journal de Rome gave us a hint : " So LONG AS THE 
 " ENGLISH SOVEREIGN SHALL NOT HAVE ABDICATED THE 
 "RELIGIOUS SUPREMACY USURPED BY HENRY VIII., SO 
 " long as the Anglican Church lasts, England can have only 
 " an officious agent at the Vatican'' On January 10, 1883. 
 the Journal de Rome published an article on the reply 
 which Mr. Gladstone had sent, a little time previously, to 
 Dr. Badenoch ; viz., " that he had no knowledge of any 
 " intention of Her Majesty's Government to renew diplo- 
 "matic relations with the Holy See," and said that this 
 denial would have been true if he had said : " he no longer 
 "entertained any such intention ; because, five weeks ago, 
 "the British Government did seriously entertain that in- 
 dention. The true word of the situation has been given 
 " in the Daily News, the official organ of a certain member 
 " of the Cabinet ; namely , the moment is inopportune for
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 701 
 
 " re-establishing those relations. . . . We repeat that, 
 " a few weeks ago, the British Government was resolved on 
 " taking that step ; but on very energetic remonstrances, 
 "having been addressed by certain friends, it had to be 
 " given up." On January 8, a telegram from Rome, in the 
 Morning Post, had informed us that " negotiations had so 
 "far proceeded that the English Government saw no ob- 
 jection to the Vatican designating Cardinal McCabe to 
 " be Papal delegate, virtually acting, though in an unofficial 
 " form, as Papal Nuncio." 
 
 On January n, a telegram from Rome, in the Morning 
 Post, showed how anxious the Pope was to push on the 
 negotiations : " The Vatican is determined to give pub- 
 " licity to the whole affair if the negotiations should fail ;" 
 then, rehearsing, the Pope's words in public, that " a 
 "triumph was approaching for the (Roman) Catholic 
 "Church," he explained it by saying, "a semi-official 
 " agent of the Gladstone Administration is leading 
 " Cardinal Jacobini to rely on the support of England in 
 "the event of the Roman question being brought before 
 "a Conference (i.e. the question of the Pope's temporal 
 "dominions)." He added: "Negotiations continue, and 
 "the name of Mr. Plunket is spoken of, at the Vatican, as 
 "the possible permanent English agent there. Mr. Plunket 
 "is a Catholic and an Irishman." The Standard then 
 confirmed the report that the Vatican intended to publish 
 the whole correspondence, and an account of the negotia- 
 tions, if the British Government should attempt to back 
 out of them. On January 13, the Journal de Rome was 
 able to announce that "the Cabinet of St. James has a 
 "strong desire to re-enter into direct relations with the 
 " Vatican ; and the Vatican itself has no less such a desire ; 
 "but circumstances render it difficult to attain to the 
 " desired result . . . Yet the question must be adjourned 
 "for a time ; because some letters appeared, in which it 
 " was insinuated that the Holy See, out of deference to 
 " England, had exerted a pressure on the Irish Episcopate,
 
 702 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " in order to get them to use their influence in favour of 
 "the British Government." 
 
 Nevertheless, it appears that the negotiations were con- 
 tinued ; for, on March 9, Mr. Errington went in state to 
 the Vatican, on the Pope's birthday and Coronation day, 
 to " present the congratulations of the English Govern- 
 " ment, and was received at the Vatican with the same 
 " honours as M. Boutineff, the Russian envoy." This gave 
 rise to questionings in the House of Commons ; but Lord 
 E. Fitzmaurice, on March 19, assured the House that the 
 Government had " never proposed a scheme for establish- 
 " ing a British resident at the Vatican." This assertion he 
 repeated on the 24th, adding that " Mr. Errington had not 
 " been a channel of communication between the Foreign 
 " Office and the Vatican." Later in the evening, how- 
 ever, Mr. Gladstone admitted that Mr. Errington held an 
 accrediting letter to Cardinal Jacobini. Then a great deal 
 more of the usual quibbling on the subject was resorted 
 to, in which Mr. Gladstone did not display his usual 
 dexterity ; and he came out of it very badly. 
 
 It is not in reference to good and praiseworthy acts that 
 men quibble. When they have done a good deed, they do 
 not usually deny it. Yet, on this matter, we have had 
 repeated exhibitions of evasion and equivocation on the 
 one side ; and suspicion, well or ill-founded, on the other. 
 The earliest inquiries received for answer, that the Govern- 
 ment knew nothing whatsoever about Mr. Errington, he hav- 
 ing gone to Rome entirely on his own business. Thereupon 
 came indignant remonstrances from the Vatican : What 
 meant those denials and equivocations ? Was his Holiness 
 being trifled with ? Then we were informed that Mr. 
 Errington had gone to Rome with the sanction of the 
 Government, but only to discuss, with Cardinal Jacobini, 
 the Catholic Vicariates in India ! Still, however, he re- 
 mained in Rome, while his co-religionist, Lord Ripon, 
 created entanglements in India. The Vicariates had been 
 disposed of, and yet Mr. Errington only came to England
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 703 
 
 to hurry back to Rome ; and came and went again. Why 
 was that ? Next it leaked out that Mr. Errington had 
 been furnished with a letter of credence. Still he remained 
 in Rome, " to discuss the Vicariates of India," forsooth. 
 In May (25th and 29th), suspicious questions again arose, 
 and were met again by most unworthy quibblings ; until 
 at last, on May 31, the pent-up indignation burst out in 
 torrents of abuse and recriminations, which lasted to the 
 small hours in the morning, and called forth a liberal 
 exercise of all the arts of evasion, circumlocution, and 
 equivocation in order to mislead and conceal. At last 
 (June i), a communication appeared in Mr. Gladstone's 
 organ, the Daily News, admitting that " Mr. Errington had 
 " acted as a channel of communication between the Holy 
 " See and Her Majesty's Government, on various questions 
 " besides those relating to Ireland'' He had busied himself 
 in relation to the Mahdi, and enabled Vicar-Apostolic 
 Sojaro to go to Khartoum ! At length, on June 7, the 
 Government found themselves compelled to admit that 
 Mr. Errington had gone to Rome with credentials from 
 Lord Granville ; and that he had negotiated with the Pope 
 concerning the government of Ireland ; and that official 
 records of the transactions had been preserved in the 
 Archives of the Foreign Office. Thus ended a long tissue 
 of evasions, false statements, and misleading protestations, 
 which had been resorted to in order to conceal a con- 
 spiracy to establish diplomatic relations with the Pope, 
 against the law of the land. 
 
 No. XCIII. 
 
 EARLY in November, 1883, the organ of the Government, 
 the Daily News, stated that Mr. Errington was to negotiate 
 with the Pope on various subjects, " the chief of which was 
 "the subject of Irish emigration to America ; for the Va- 
 " tican is averse to such a solution of the Irish difficulty,
 
 704 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 ". . . On this matter, it is stated that the Pope will 
 "hold a consultation next Tuesday, with Mr. Errington. 
 " Cardinal Manning, and several American bishops. 
 "... Another subject which is reported to be exer- 
 " cising the mind of His Holiness, is the Orange agitation 
 " in the north of Ireland. He is said to be incensed against 
 " the British Government for not putting it down with a 
 "strong hand'.' That was a revelation to make to a British 
 public ! The question of Irish emigration to America 
 was to be discussed and settled, not by English Ministers 
 in Downing Street, but by papal bishops in the Vatican ! 
 And the Pope was wroth with his naughty children, the 
 British Cabinet, for not putting down the loyal Orange 
 protests, in the north of Ireland, " with a strong hand ! " 
 We have indeed got very far. The Pope must be the real 
 ruler of the British Empire ! The British Government had 
 devised a plan for the emigration of the Irish ; and the Earl 
 of Derby had argued, with his usual force and perspicuity, 
 in favour of it. But the Pope, after consultation with some 
 bishops, dissented. Then Mr. Trevelyan, the Irish Secre- 
 tary, announced that " nothing whatever had been done on 
 " the part of the Government about Irish emigration." For 
 Dr. Croke, the Romish Archbishop of Tuam, and his clergy, 
 and various other ecclesiastics, had got up meetings and 
 protests and "indignant remonstrances," to back up the 
 Government in giving way, or to terrify them if they 
 should prove recalcitrant. 
 
 On the I4th of November, however, the Rev. " Edward 
 " Redmond, D.D., Priest of the Diocese of Westminster," 
 one of Cardinal Manning's priests, anticipated Dr. Nulty, 
 the Romanist Bishop of Meath, in a letter to the Freeman s 
 Journal, on Mr. Errington's mission, and warned the Pope 
 that the Roman " Curia, if it judges the case adversely to 
 " the Irish people, on an ex parte statement, will run the 
 " risk of dealing a blow that may prove mortal to the 
 " Catholic Church throughout the English-speaking world." 
 The Times of the 2/th also stated that "the American
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 75 
 
 " bishops in Rome, most of whom are Irishmen by birth 
 " or descent, are strongly opposed to Mr. Errington's alleged 
 " object of obtaining still further Papal condemnation of 
 " the Irish political movements." Here were apparent 
 contradictions and intricacies in a tortuous policy, which 
 greatly confused men's minds as to the real aim of Mr. 
 Errington's negotiations, until the two Papal organs, the 
 Osservatore Romano and the Moniteur de Rome, some- 
 what lifted the veil. These were the words of the latter 
 newspaper : " Certain persons, while rendering due homage 
 "to the Holy See, fear that Leo XIII. will avail him- 
 " self of these embassies (Mr. Errington and the others) as 
 "an instrument against Italy. These apprehensions have 
 " again appeared during the late negotiations with England. 
 " What seems to give these doubts a certain appearance of 
 "truth, is the fact that Leo XIII. never ceases to raise his 
 " voice against the Italian Government." 
 
 On both sides it was a tortuous policy. The Pope had 
 issued circulars to the Irish bishops, as if he desired to allay 
 the Irish movement ; and all the bishops except Archbishop 
 McCabe, and nearly all the priests of Ireland, were openly 
 active in promoting it. The Pope condemned the " Parnell 
 " Testimonial Fund " ; and the Roman Catholic bishops 
 and priests and newspapers suppressed the condemnation, 
 and promoted subscriptions to the fund, and were active in 
 advancing " the Parnellite or so-called National League." 
 Monsignor Concoran, Archbishop of Philadelphia, more- 
 over, on his return from Rome, 1 said that " Mr. Parnell is 
 " regarded without any disfavour in Rome ; and it was 
 " well understood that the Papal letter was intended solely 
 "for the clergy. ... A proper agitation might pro- 
 " ceed, as it had done before, and the extent of the partici- 
 " pation of the priests would depend upon their bishops ; " 
 and yet the Pope pretended to censure Dr. Croke, the 
 Archbishop of Cashel. But, on the other hand, he blessed 
 those who should aid in building a church in memory of 
 1 St. James's Gazette, Jan. 14, 1884. 
 
 Z Z
 
 706 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 O'Connell, at Cahirciveen, and promised to furnish the 
 first stone and depute the Archbishop of Cashel to lay it 
 for him. 
 
 In the Papal organ of April n, 1884, the Journal de 
 Rome, there appeared a very long article on " England and 
 " the Holy See," in which it said : " The chiefs of the two 
 ^ great political parties in England entertain no objection to 
 " the re-establishment of direct relations with the Holy See. 
 " They have often and often had recourse, indirectly, to the in- 
 " tervention of the Pope ; and generally addressed them- 
 " selves to him through the Nuncios of Paris or Brussels. 
 " . . . But, latterly, Mr. Errington has been charged 
 " with missions which were at first denied, but afterwards 
 " acknowledged. As we have already said, the leaders of 
 " both parties desire nothing more than to enter into relations 
 " with the Pope, and all they are afraid of is, the opposition 
 "of their extreme supporters the Radicals on the side of 
 " the Liberals, and the Orangemen who belong to the Con- 
 " servative party. . . . Pope Leo XIII. has, since youth, 
 " been studying assiduously the history of Ireland, and he 
 " knows very well that the present Prime Minister of 
 " England fervently hopes to make reparation for all the 
 " crimes and errors of his predecessors ; and the Pope is 
 " ready to assist him in his endeavours ; . . . but to 
 " this end, the re-establishment of direct diplomatic relations 
 " is necessary." On the I4th of May, the same journal 
 returned to the subject, and wrote : " BEACONSFIELD AND 
 " GLADSTONE both understood perfectly that it was their 
 " interest to utilize the tremendous power (of the Papacy) ; 
 " and therefore they neglected nothing in endeavouring to 
 " renew and draw closer official diplomatic relations with the 
 " Pope, . . . and MAKE AN ANGLO- ROMAN ALLIANCE. 
 "... Mr. Errington was charged with the negotia- 
 tions relative to this rapprochement, and had a long inter- 
 " view with Cardinal Jacobini before he last left Rome for 
 " England. He has now returned, bringing with him 
 " explicit declarations of the concessions which can be
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 707 
 
 " made to the Holy See towards the attainment of the 
 " desired end." 
 
 At the end of the year 1884 (Dec. 31), Mr. Errington re- 
 turned to Rome to discuss questions relating to the English 
 Colonies ; and in January, he was busy on the question 
 whether the Irish bishops were to follow the lead of Arch- 
 bishop Croke and Mr. Parnell, or adopt the more suave line 
 of Cardinal McCabe. Cardinal McCabe then died, very 
 opportunely for all the Irish bishops and Monsignor Kirby, 
 who strongly opposed him. The priests of the diocese chose 
 Dr. Walsh, a Nationalist of the type of Archbishop Croke, 
 as dignissimus ; and Dr. Donnelly, who followed Cardinal 
 McCabe, as dignior. The contest promised to be a hot 
 one; and it was given out that Mr. Errington was to 
 support the latter. That was the news of April 24, 1885. 
 It must be remembered that, on the death of Cardinal 
 McCabe, the Queen sent the expressions of her sympathy 
 to the Chapter of Dublin ; and Dr. Walsh energetically 
 opposed any address of thanks being sent to the Queen, or 
 any notice being taken of her message. On the 28th of 
 April, however, Lord E. Fitzmaurice denied that any in- 
 structions had been sent to Mr. Errington on the subject. 
 This denial was repeated on the last of April. On the nth 
 of May it was announced that Dr. Walsh had been made 
 Archbishop of Dublin. 
 
 On May 17, 1885, the Papal organ, the Moniteur de Rome, 
 replied that " Mr. Errington will return to Rome in the 
 " capacity of British Ambassador to the Holy See." This 
 would be nothing less than a violation of the Constitution ; 
 for, by the Act declaring the rights and liberties of the 
 subject, and settling the succession to the Crown (1689. i. 
 W. & M.), it is part of the fundamental law of the Church 
 and State, that " every person or persons that is, are, or 
 " shall be reconciled to, or shall hold Communion with the 
 " See or Church of Rome, or shall profess the Popish religion, 
 " shall be excluded, and for ever be incapable to inherit, 
 " possess, or enjoy the Crown and Government of this
 
 7o8 RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 " realm and Ireland and the dominions thereunto belong-- 
 
 o 
 
 " ing, or any part of the same ; or to have, use, or exercise 
 " any royal power, authority, or jurisdiction within the 
 same." 
 
 Neither will this be the end of Mr. Errington's mission ; 
 nor may we look upon it as an isolated transaction. It is 
 part of the intrigue which has lit the flames of agitation, 
 and even revolution in Ireland ; the intrigue which has 
 filled that fertile land with unsightly ruins, to which no 
 history is attached, and which no pleasant memories em- 
 bellish. Such ruins are monuments of ignoble statesmen, 
 who have ruled and legislated by means of panic and pas- 
 sion. There we see the ruins of an " alien Church," de- 
 spoiled without advantage to religion, and with a manifest 
 diminution of godliness. There we see sumptuous man- 
 sions of indulgent landlords deserted, and their broad acres 
 either abandoned or subdivided among bankrupt and 
 indolent tenants. Here we see statesmen in the white 
 shroud, holding the extinguished candle, and doing a 
 theatrical penance, in abject hypocrisy, for the acts of re- 
 taliation which were committed, by English Parliaments, 
 three centuries ago. Here we see Birmingham politicians 
 uniting with Jesuits and Socialists, to rob the landlords 
 of 1 88 1, by way of making amends for the selfishness 
 of tradesmen and manufacturers in 1688. There we find 
 " messages of peace " acquired by violence, and sent to 
 reward the Irish agitators for their disaffection, and feed 
 the horse-leeches which have been sucking out the life- 
 blood of England. There we find communistic ideas, and 
 socialistic principles sowed up and down the land by a 
 religious order of that so-called " Holy Church," which has 
 overridden the populace of Ireland, and has professed to 
 stem the roaring tide of Communism. There we find out- 
 rages encouraged, and revolution fomented by those wolves 
 in the clothing of " the Lamb that was slain," while they 
 boast that they are the Church whose principle it is to 
 inculcate gentleness, to deprecate retaliation, and to con-
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 709 
 
 demn sedition. Outrage engenders outrage ; and " the 
 " still small voice " is unheard amid the clangour and 
 stridulent shouts of political maniacs ; while the Land 
 Acts, so far from being " messages of peace," or stilling 
 the excitement, have been as the taste of blood to the 
 young tiger that has been fondled and brought up on 
 milk. 
 
 Turning our eyes from the ruins that have been wrought 
 at home, what do we see abroad ? During the five years of 
 Mr. Gladstone's Government, we find not one glorious deed 
 to relieve the dull monotony of ignominy and disgrace : 
 General Gordon shamefully abandoned. Those who trusted 
 to us in Khartoum, all massacred. The Soudan deserted, 
 and the friendly tribes delivered to the avenger's hand. 
 In Africa the same dishonour was incurred ; our duty for- 
 saken, and our allies left for vengeance. In Afghanistan, 
 nought but dishonour and disgrace. Everywhere our flag 
 has been hauled down, and our prestige is gone. So is our 
 power ; for at the first shot of a continental war, the 
 French Romanists of Canada will rise in rebellion, and call 
 on France to help them. The Romanists in Ireland also 
 will rebel, and the French will "deliver" them from the 
 grasp of England. In our colonies, too, we may have 
 trouble from the Romanists, whom we have nursed and 
 dandled, and to whom we have given all that they asked, 
 and more than they could justly claim, ruining the land- 
 lords, and robbing the Protestant Church to please them. 
 Truly it is heartbreaking to think of the dishonour attached 
 to the name of England, in every quarter of the globe; the 
 unity of our Empire endangered, our commercial prosperity 
 well-nigh shattered, and our race persistently humiliated ; 
 while Ireland has been turned into a Pandemonium by a 
 Romanizing policy, which has been carried out by con- 
 spirators who have simulated Protestantism and pretended 
 an honest desire to make their fellow-citizens contented, 
 while their real aim has been to extend the power of the 
 Pope.
 
 ?io RECENT EVENTS, AND A 
 
 In former years millions of men looked upon Mr. Glad- 
 stone as the wisest man, the most accomplished orator, 
 and the greatest statesman of his age. Was the common 
 voice so utterly in error ? Even now, after we have winced, 
 year by year, under the humiliations and slights, the loss 
 of power and loss of prestige which he has made us under- 
 go, many thousands still look on him as by far the most 
 capable Minister, and his Cabinet as the Ministry of all 
 the talents. How is it, then, that the kingdom of England, 
 the Empire of Her Majesty, has been so often and so deeply 
 humbled ? How is it that we have been made to submit 
 to so many indignities ? How have we so often suffered 
 in dignity and honour? How is it that the minds of 
 Englishmen have become so subdued and broken, that we 
 scarcely dare to raise our voices against such a ruinous, 
 such a perfidious policy, as that of the last few years ? 
 How is it that we speak in whispers, and with bated breath, 
 instead of bracing our minds for one supreme effort to rid 
 us of the horrid incubus ? How is it, I say ? Has such 
 a talented, such a capable, such an all-wise Minister really 
 fallen into so many blunders ? 
 
 We do not call that a blunder which has been done with 
 a set purpose, and which has met with all the success that 
 was desired. The policy of Mr. Gladstone was a series of 
 blunders, if his aim was the grandeur and magnification of 
 the Empire. But what if he had some other end in view ? 
 and what if all his acts have been carefully planned to attain 
 that end (which they must have been if he is really intel- 
 ligent and prudent) ? You ask me what that end can be. 
 I tell you to see what end the acts of the most intellectual 
 and prudent Minister have brought us to. I ask you to 
 consider whither all the acts of that Heaven-born Minister, 
 without exception, have consistently tended ; and whether 
 all his policy has been successfully directed to one end ? 
 Then grant me the postulate that that was really the aim 
 of the Heaven-born Minister. What was it ? The same 
 as that of his great friend and adviser, Cardinal Manning :
 
 CLUE TO THEIR SOLUTION. 711 
 
 " to subjugate and subdue, to conquer and rule an imperial 
 " race ; to bend or else break that will which nations and 
 " kingdoms have found invincible and inflexible ;" because 
 that " if Protestantism is conquered in England, it will be 
 " conquered throughout the world." 
 
 Butler & Tanner, The Selwood Printing Works, Frome and London.
 
 of CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 -r -- Y1 L TXT
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 ormL9 15m-10,'48(B1039)444
 
 UC SOUTHERN HEGIONA 
 
 A 000813535 2 
 
 DA 
 560 
 M76r 
 1886