fHE ] [BRARY 
 
 [HE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CAL IFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 THE MEANING OF 
 HOME RULE 
 
 NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 
 
 ADDRESSED TO THE "MAN IN THE STREET," 
 
 BY THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. JESSE POLLINGS, J.P., M.P. 
 
 LONDON: THE RURAL WORLD PUBLISHING CO., Ltd, 
 11 (Mil, Strand, W.C. 
 
 [PRICE SIXPENCE.]
 
 >>>>>, 
 
 v 
 
 v DA 
 
 . 
 
 CO 
 
 i 
 
 THE MEANING OF 
 
 WITH 
 
 I NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 
 
 H j 
 
 Hi J- ADDRESSED TO THE "MAN IN THE STREET," 
 
 BY THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. JESSE COLL1NGS, J.P., M.P. 
 
 391865
 
 THE MEANING OF 
 HOME RULE. 
 
 During the passing through the House of Commons of the 
 Home Rule Bill of 1893, I took notes of the leading provisions 
 and principal points in the measure, and published them week 
 by week in the Rural World. I was encouraged at the time to 
 dp this especially by the late Lord James of Hereford (then 
 Sir Henry James). He said that though the Bill would probably 
 be passed in the Commons the question would not be done with, 
 and that a concise account of what took place in the House 
 would at a future time be most useful for those of the public 
 who had not time or opportunity to wade through long speeches 
 or to understand and master the intricate debates which took 
 place in Parliament on the subject. 
 
 The method adopted in the Notes was to quote the important 
 clauses in the Bill as they came up in Committee, to give the 
 different amendments moved to them, and to add the measure 
 of support both clauses and amendments received, and then, by 
 dissecting the votes, to show the nature of that support and 
 opposition. 
 
 EXAMPLE OF THE METHOD ADOPTED. 
 
 (See page 44 of -< -Notes. "J 
 
 Mr. Gladstone's Bill was not framed on the principle of 
 devolution that is, conferring certain definite powers on the 
 Irish Parliament but all powers were given to the Irish Legis- 
 lature except the few relating to certain questions named in 
 Clause 3 and 4. But it was difficult to see how the Irish Legis- 
 lature could be prevented from dealing with these if so 
 disposed. Accordingly Lord Wolmer (now Earl of Selborne) 
 moved an amendment with the object of preventing the Irish 
 Parliament from passing resolutions as well as laws, on the 
 subjects with which they were forbidden to deal such as inter- 
 fering with foreign affairs, sending emissaries to foreign courts, 
 intriguing with our enemies in time of war, etc. 
 
 The Government, through the Solicitor-General, frankly 
 admitted the danger, but the Irish Nationalists were strongly 
 against the amendment, and Mr. Gladstone in opposing it, made 
 the significant statement that the Imperial Parliament would 
 have no power to enforce such a safeguard if it were adopted. 
 
 It is evident that Mr. Gladstone was right in his contention, 
 for with an Irish Executive responsible to an Irish Parliament 
 alone for its actions, the only power of control a British Govern- 
 ment could exercise would be that of armed force. 
 
 The discussion on this amendment lasted five hours. It was 
 defeated by a Government majority of twenty-one in the whole 
 House, but if British votes only ^are reckoned the Government 
 were in a minority of twenty-nine.
 
 2 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 It will thus be seen that by the method adopted in the 
 Notes, of which the above is an example, the pith and meaning 
 of a subject which may have caused a long debate are given in 
 a few lines. 
 
 HOME RULE AGAIN TO THE FRONT. 
 
 Home Rule is again to the front, the old struggle is being 
 repeated, and the country is entering on a fierce agitation over 
 a question which is one of supreme importance. In the present 
 contest we shall see repeated, in support of Home Rule, the 
 same concealment, and the same plausible statements and sup- 
 pression of facts which characterised former agitations. 
 
 Many have forgotten the events of 1886 and 1893; and to 
 the younger generation of voters, to all those say under forty 
 years of age, the subject is new. For these reasons I thought 
 it might be useful to republish the " Notes on Home Rule " as 
 they appeared at the time in the Rural World, in order that the 
 real meaning of Home Rule may be seen, not based on opinions, 
 but on fact and authority that cannot be disputed. 
 
 A Home Rule Bill has been twice introduced into the House 
 of Commons. That of 1886 was defeated on the second reading 
 by a majority of thirty; that of 1893 was passed by the Com- 
 mons but thrown out by the House of Lords. The action of the 
 Lords on that occasion was subsequently approved by the con- 
 stituencies at the general election of 1895, when the Unionists 
 were returned with a majority of 152. 
 
 The existence of the present Government depends on the 
 support of the Irish Nationalist Party, and Mr. John Redmond 
 has made it a condition of that support that Mr. Asquith shall 
 pass a Home Rule Bill without delay. With the present balance 
 of parties in the House of Commons, and by a system of what 
 is known as log-rolling, under which the Government holds its 
 majority by concessions and promises made to each section of the 
 present Coalition as the price of its support, there will be no 
 difficulty in passing a Home Rule Bill through that House. 
 It will, however, be certainly defeated in the House of Lords, 
 and there is no reason to doubt that the action of the Lords 
 would again be confirmed by the electors were they permitted 
 by the Government to pass judgment upon it. 
 
 VETO OR PARLIAMENT ACT. 
 
 The object, therefore, of the recent Veto Act is to overcome 
 this difficulty by destroying the powers of the House of Peers 
 for two years, during which interval the Home Rule Bill is to 
 be passed behind the back and without the consent of the con- 
 stituencies. The "predominant partner" is to be ignored, and 
 the British electors are not even to be consulted. 
 
 This is the corrupt bargain made between the Government 
 and their allies, the Irish Nationalists, by which the unity of 
 the kingdom is to be bartered away for place and power.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 3 
 
 As an excuse for this arbitrary proceeding, this insult 
 to the electors, the Government declare that in the general 
 election of January, 1910, Home Rule was a question at issue, 
 and that they received a mandate from the constituencies to carry 
 it out. This statement, as facts show, is untrue. 
 
 Home Rule as a direct issue of this contest was not put in the 
 election address of the Prime Minister or in that of any of his 
 colleagues in the Cabinet.* 
 
 The reason for ignoring it is plain. They were afraid to 
 put it in the front lest public opinion should be aroused. If 
 Home Rule had been put forward as the issue of the contest, it 
 is most probable that the Liberal Party would have been defeated. 
 As it was the Government lost 105 seats as the result of that elec- 
 tion. The Liberal majority of 336 in 1906 had dwindled down 
 to 124 in 1910. 
 
 Sir Edward Carson, in the debate of August, 1911, quoted a 
 circular issued to the electors by Sir E. J. Scares, who was then 
 Government Whip, the terms of which were as follows: 
 
 " I hope you will not be led astray by the Home Rule bogey 
 with which our opponents are attempting to confuse the issue. 
 You have known me long enough to rely upon my word, and 
 I definitely pledge myself to vote against an Independent 
 Parliament for Ireland and against any scheme for the separa- 
 tion of the two countries." 
 
 Now, a Government Whip is the agent and mouthpiece of 
 the Cabinet, and such a circular as this could not have been 
 issued without authority. In the face of these facts, no one, 
 whatever his views may be, can say that Home Rule was an issue 
 at the election. 
 
 By the surrender of the Lords, who seem to have " com- 
 mitted suicide to save themselves from slaughter," the Veto 
 Bill has become law, and the way is now clear for the Govern- 
 ment to introduce their Home Rule Bill without let. 
 
 HISTORICAL. 
 
 The term " Home Rule " is both attractive and elastic. It 
 might mean anything from simple local government to complete 
 autonomy. 
 
 *The only direct allusions to Home Rule in the addresses of Cabinet 
 Ministers in January, 1910, were as follows : (i) Mr. Buxton : " I am, 
 and always have been, in favour of Home Rule." (2) Mr. Haldane 
 (after referring to Irish Land Purchase) : " Thus equipped he " (the Irish 
 peasant) " will be the better qualified to take that larger part in the 
 administration of Irish affairs which, now as formerly, seems to me to 
 be the key to the solution of the Irish problem." (3) Mr. Burns : " I am 
 in favour of such Legislative Independence for Ireland, in Irish affairs, 
 as will enable that country to revive her industries, maintain her popula- 
 tion, and stimulate her social and agrarian prosperity in accordance 
 with Irish ideas. The Imperial supremacy of the Federal British Parlia- 
 ment in Imperial matters affecting all sections of the United Kingdom 
 to remain inviolate." (4) Mr. Lloyd George did not issue an address.
 
 4 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Since the measures were fought and defeated in 1886 and 
 1893, a new generation of voters has, I repeat, come into public 
 life whose knowledge of the Irish question is based mainly on 
 tradition, reading or hearsay. 
 
 In what follows, therefore, for the sake of plainness it 
 is necessary to refer to facts that are now historical, so that the 
 younger members of the community may trace for themselves 
 the progress of events up to the present crisis. 
 
 With most of the younger generation Home Rule is regarded 
 as a part and parcel of the traditional policy of the Liberal 
 Party, a sort of shibboleth to be uttered in order to enter the 
 Liberal ranks; but this is quite contrary to the fact. British 
 constituencies have ever been opposed to the demands of the 
 Irish Nationalists. British representatives defeated the Home 
 Rule Bill of 1886, and the third reading of the Bill of 1893 was 
 carried by Irish votes, there being a British majority of twenty- 
 three against the measure. 
 
 The leaders of the Liberal Party, especially Air. Gladstone, 
 were strongly opposed to the Nationalist demands up to the 
 close of 1885, when Mr. Gladstone surrendered to Mr. Parnell, 
 the Irish leader, and to the party whom he had previously 
 described as " marching through rapine to the dismemberment 
 of the Empire." 
 
 1885. 
 
 The year 1885 was an eventful one. The Reform Bill of 
 1884, which extended the franchise to the counties, and gave the 
 vote to the rural householders, made a general election necessary. 
 During its progress Home Rule was referred to in general terms 
 as one of the many questions before the electors, but there was 
 nothing in the shape of any agreement with regard to it. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone's utterances with respect to it were very vague, 
 inconclusive and uncertain. In his election address he said that 
 the time had come to reform the administrative abuses connected 
 with Dublin Castle. He appealed strongly to the constituencies 
 to give him a majority quite independent of the Irish vote. 
 
 " It will be," he said, " a vital danger to the country and to 
 the empire if at a time when a demand from Ireland for larger 
 powers of self-government is to be dealt with, there is not in 
 Parliament a party totally independent of the Irish vote." 
 
 Time after time he insisted that such a position as this 
 would not be safe for the country that it would be a disastrous 
 position for Mr. Parnell to hold the balance between parties in 
 the House of Commons. He pointed out how difficult it would 
 be to carry the Liberal Party and the British nation in favour of 
 an Irish legislature. (Letter to Lord Rosebery November I3th, 
 1885.) 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain, while excluding Home Rule as impossible, 
 urged on the Government the adoption of a plan of local govern- 
 ment for Ireland by the creation of representative county boards
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 5 
 
 and a central board or council for all Ireland, with large 
 administrative and executive powers. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone was strongly in favour of this scheme, and 
 wrote (letter to Lord Granville, October 8th, 1885) that he and 
 Mr. Chamberlain " are pretty well agreed on the Irish question." 
 Unfortunately, the majority of the Cabinet rejected the scheme, 
 much to the regret of Mr. Gladstone, who wrote : " I have seen 
 my way pretty well to the minor and rejected plan, but the idea 
 of the wider one puzzles me." 
 
 The pollings in the general election took place in November 
 and December, 1885, when the newly-enfranchised rural house- 
 holders voted. The result of the pollings was that the Liberals 
 were returned by a considerable majority, but not one inde- 
 pendent of the Irish Nationalists, for which Mr. Gladstone had 
 so earnestly pleaded, and which, to his mortification, he did not 
 get. Had there been such a majority it is fairly certain that the 
 Prime Minister would not have given himself over to the 
 Nationalists so completely as he afterwards did. 
 
 In Ireland Mr. Parnell ordered his followers to vote against 
 the Liberal Party, with a result that not a single Liberal was 
 returned for that country. 
 
 Mr. Parnell's policy was a simple one. It was to keep the 
 number of Liberals and Conservatives on a level, so that he might 
 hold the balance between the two parties. 
 
 In December there were statements in the Press and general 
 rumours to the effect that Mr. Gladstone had accepted Home 
 Rule, for which, however, he denied all responsibility. But 
 Lord Hartington was uneasy at what was termed the " Hawarden 
 Kite," and wrote to Mr. Gladstone on the subject. The result of 
 his communications was that he, Lord Hartington, was enabled 
 to state in a public letter (December 2Oth) that no proposals of 
 Liberal policy respecting the Nationalist demands had been 
 made to him. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone so late as December 30th stated that he was 
 " conditionally in favour of at least examining the Nationalist 
 demands." So matters stood at the end of 1885. 
 
 1886. 
 
 On January I2th, 1886, Parliament met, a Conservative 
 Government being in office. I moved an amendment to the 
 Address to the Crown in favour of the agricultural labourers, 
 allotments, small holdings, etc. The amendment was carried, 
 Lord Salisbury resigned, and Mr. Gladstone became Prime 
 Minister, and proceeded to form his Government. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone spoke, and voted in favour of the amend- 
 ment. As a matter of fairness and honour a Government is 
 bound to deal with the question which had placed them in power, 
 but Mr. Gladstone completely ignored it, and, as events showed, 
 gave his whole attention to Home Rule, a question which had 
 not been before the constituencies in any definite form. This, 
 in my opinion, was a deliberate betrayal of the interests of a class
 
 6 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 of men whose hard lot and poverty-stricken condition at that 
 time entitled them to a kind consideration and a more just treat- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain was invited by Mr. Gladstone to join 
 the new Government, but he declined to do so on account of the 
 Irish policy which, it was rumoured, the new Prime Minister 
 intended to carry out. Mr. Gladstone, however, assured him 
 that he had not, up to that date, formed any definite plan, but 
 that he had only committed himself to examination and inquiry, 
 and on that assurance Mr. Chamberlain consented to join the 
 Ministry. 
 
 It is difficult to understand how such an assurance could 
 have been given. Parliament met on February i8th, with Mr. 
 Gladstone as Prime Minister; on March 26th Mr. Chamberlain 
 and others left the Government; and on April 8th a complete 
 Home Rule Bill for Ireland was placed before the House of 
 Commons. Eight days later a Land Bill for Ireland was also 
 introduced. It is hard to believe that in such short intervals 
 any effective examination and inquiry could have taken place, 
 or that there was time to decide on the provisions of, and to 
 draft, such large, complicated and far-reaching measures as 
 these two Bills proved to be. 
 
 Members of the House of Commons as well as the con- 
 stituencies were taken aback at the suddenness with which these 
 proposals were sprung upon them, and at the secrecy with which 
 they had been prepared without consulting the party. It 
 appears from evidence that not even his colleagues were con- 
 sulted by Mr. Gladstone as to the provisions of the Home Rule 
 Bill; and that it was not until March I3th, about three weeks 
 before its introduction, that the measure was mentioned in the 
 Cabinet ! 
 
 After the introduction of the Bill, and the definite pro- 
 posals of Mr. Gladstone became known, there was a vigorous 
 opposition to the measure throughout the country. Mr. Bright 
 wrote to Mr. Gladstone, saying: 
 
 " I am not in favour of Home Rule or the creation of a 
 Dublin Parliament. I cannot consent to a measure which is so 
 offensive to the whole Protestant population of Ireland and to the 
 whole sentiment of Ulster as far as its loyal Protestant people 
 are concerned. . . . Your policy of surrender to them 
 (Nationalists) could only place more power in their hands to 
 war with greater effect against the unity of the three kingdoms, 
 with no increase of good to the Irish people. . . . The Bill 
 will have the support of the rebel members, it will be opposed by 
 a majority from Great Britain, and by a most hostile vote from 
 all that is loyal in Ulster. . . . If a majority support you 
 it will be one composed in effect of men who for six years past 
 have insulted the Queen, torn down the national flag, etc." 
 
 In the same month the Rev. C. H. Spurgeon, then in the 
 height of his influence with the Nonconformists, wrote: 
 
 " I feel especially the wrong to be done to our Ulster brethren. 
 What have they done to be thus cast off? The whole scheme is 
 full of dangers and absurdities as if it came from a madman."
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL T 
 
 It was evident to the British people that to have two Parlia- 
 ments and two executives in these small islands of ours was 
 absurd; and that to have a separate Home Office, Treasury, 
 Education, etc., not controlled by the Imperial Parliament was to 
 confer on Ireland all the attributes of an independent nation, 
 and must be a source of constant irritation and danger, and that 
 continual conflict in legislation must be the inevitable result. 
 
 On May 3 1st, when the Bill seemed to hang in the balance, 
 Mr. Chamberlain called a meeting of Liberals to consider what 
 action they should take. Fifty-five members attended. The 
 question arose whether they should vote against the Bill or, from 
 loyalty to Mr. Gladstone, abstain from voting. If they 
 abstained the Bill would be carried by a very small majority.. 
 Mr. Bright, who could not attend the meeting, wrote to say that 
 he should certainly vote against the Bill. After a full discussion 
 the meeting unanimously decided to take the same course. 
 
 From that moment the fate of the measure was decided. 
 
 REJECTION OF THE BILL. 
 
 On the motion for the second reading of the Bill, May i/th, 
 Lord Hartington moved its rejection. On the division (June 
 7th), in a full House, 313 members voted for the second 
 reading and 343 against. The Bill was thus defeated by a 
 majority of thirty. No less than ninety-three Liberals voted 
 with the majority against the Bill. This decision was ratified 
 by the general election which followed on July 2/th, 1886, the 
 Unionists being returned with a majority of 118. Mr. Gladstone 
 resigned, and Lord Salisbury became Prime Minister, and re- 
 mained in office till the dissolution of Parliament in June, 1892. 
 
 THE UNIONIST PARTY. 
 
 By his ill-fated measure Mr. Gladstone had succeeded in- 
 destroying the Liberal Party, never again to be restored on its 
 old lines. The dissentient Liberals joined the Conservatives, 
 and thus was formed the Unionist Party. The remaining 
 Liberals joined the Irish Nationalists, and became the 
 Gladstonian or Separatist Party. It was at the time predicted 
 
 that the Unionist Alliance would not last six months. It has, 
 however, lasted twenty-five years, the two wings of the party 
 showing the greatest loyalty to each other. It is now stronger 
 than ever, and more determined than ever to maintain the Union 
 at all costs. 
 
 Discussions, letters, and speeches by both sides followed the 
 rejection of the Bill. Mr. John Bright, writing to a corre- 
 spondent in Birmingham early in 1887, said: 
 
 " I am asked why I cannot trust the leaders. I have seen 
 the course of the Nationalist leaders for six years past, and 
 have read their speeches, and see in them only hatred to Eng- 
 land and disloyalty to the Crown. . . . Am I to trust these 
 people, and make them masters of one of the three kingdoms ? '*
 
 8 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 In a letter to Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Bright said: 
 
 " It is to the eighty-six Irish members that the great English 
 Liberal Party is called upon to abandon its past policy and to 
 prostrate itself before an odious, illegal, and immoral con- 
 spiracy, and to this conspiracy grant a Parliament in Dublin. 
 We are to transfer the government of two millions of the Irish 
 people, who are as loyal as the people in Warwickshire." 
 
 He adds :- 
 
 " If Mr. Gladstone's great name were withdrawn from the 
 Bill I doubt if twenty members outside the Irish Party could be 
 found to support it." 
 
 The rejection of the Bill by such a decided majority was a 
 proof of the hostility of Great Britain to the measure. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone had exercised his marvellous powers, his un- 
 rivalled eloquence, his patient industry, all to no effect. Further, 
 he had captured the political machine. The National Liberal 
 Federation, hitherto so hostile to Home Rule, completely turned 
 round at his bidding; and almost the whole of the local Liberal 
 Associations followed suit. This was a striking example of the 
 Prime Minister's influence and power as a leader. 
 
 I may mention as a fact showing the former opposition of 
 the Liberal Party to Home Rule, that I was president of the 
 National Liberal Association before Mr. Gladstone's conversion. 
 I spoke, wrote and voted against his coercion measures, and on 
 other occasions touching his Irish policy, not, however, as presi- 
 dent but as a private member. Mr. Schnadhorst, the able secre- 
 tary of the Federation, wrote me saying that my action was 
 causing the Liberal Party to be suspected of Irish leanings. I 
 was, though president, not even summoned to the next annual 
 meeting, and was practically deposed from the presidency. In 
 1886 Mr. Schnadhorst again wrote me, but in quite another 
 strain. He used every argument to induce me to follow Mr. 
 Gladstone. He said 
 
 " you were right before and the Federation was wrong," 
 
 and that I should be right again by taking the course he urged. 
 I replied, stating that though I had opposed Mr. Gladstone's 
 drastic policy in dealing with Ireland, and had advocated an 
 extension of local government and a thorough reform of the 
 unjust Irish land system, I was not, and never had been, a Home 
 Ruler as Home Rule was defined in Mr. Gladstone's Bill ; that 
 I could not adopt the Prime Minister's change of front with 
 the agility and suddenness which he and the Liberal Federa- 
 tion had done; and that I had decided to follow Mr. Bright 
 and Mr. Chamberlain. 
 
 HOME RULE BILL, 1893. 
 
 In June and July, 1892, Parliament having been dissolved, 
 a general election took place, the result of which was to give Mr. 
 Gladstone a majority of forty. The new Parliament met, and 
 a vote of want of confidence was carried against the Govern- 
 ment by a majority of forty. Lord Salisbury resigned, and
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 9 
 
 on August 4th Mr. Gladstone became again Prime Minister, 
 when he immediately proceeded to prepare a Home Rule Bill 
 for the coming session of 1893. 
 
 This Bill, with some exceptions, was the same as that of 
 1886. It was introduced on February I3th, and the motion for 
 the second reading was made on April 6th. As soon as its 
 provisions became known, the opposition to the measure in 
 Great Britain was stronger and more pronounced than even that 
 against the Bill of 1886. 
 
 The Ulster people held a huge demonstration by means of 
 a procession of above 100,000 persons; and a great meeting of 
 15,000 persons, presided over by the Lord Mayor, was held at 
 Belfast, at which the Bill was condemned as a calamity. 
 
 During the debates on the second reading the Irish loyalists' 
 societies sent above 1,200 delegates to London to declare their 
 determination not to submit to Home Rule. It was stated by 
 the deputation that of 621 non-Episcopalian Ministers, nearly 
 all had been Liberals and supporters of Mr. Gladstone up to 
 1886, but not one of them would support him in his Home Rule 
 policy. 
 
 In the City of London a large and enthusiastic meeting 
 was held at the Guildhall, the Lord Mayor presiding, when the 
 Bill was publicly burnt in front of the building. A great demon- 
 stration was held in the Albert Hall, above 10,000 persons, being 
 present. Crowded meetings to denounce the measure were held 
 at Co vent Garden and in the Metropolitan Music Hall. 
 
 In the Provinces the same spirit prevailed. Meetings to 
 protest against the Bill were held in Manchester, Birmingham 
 and other large towns. 
 
 On the other hand, there was no similar manifestation in 
 favour of the Bill in any quarter. Almost the only demonstra- 
 tion in its favour was in the form of a procession to Hyde Park, 
 where meetings were addressed by Mr. Dillon, Mr. T. P. 
 O'Connor, and other Nationalists. 
 
 During the Easter recess and Whitsuntide, Unionist mem- 
 bers were busy on platforms in opposition to the Bill, while 
 no prominent Gladstonian, with two exceptions, ventured to say 
 a word in support of it. The followers of the Ministry main- 
 tained the same silence in the House. They were ignorant of 
 \vhat changes in the Bill Mr. Gladstone might make from day 
 to day, and therefore did not wish to commit themselves to state- 
 ments which they might afterwards have to retract. The whole 
 situation was subject to the caprices of a single man, qualified 
 by the demands of the Nationalist leader. 
 
 The discussion on the second reading of the Bill was 
 closured on April 2ist, and carried by a majority of forty-three, 
 amid loud cheers from the Irish benches.
 
 10 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 BILL IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 The Bill was driven through Committee in " water-tight '*" 
 compartments by the aid of the guillotine. Out of the forty 
 clauses and seven schedules of which the measure was originally 
 composed, only about ten clauses were discussed at all. The 
 remaining clauses and all the schedules were, by means of the 
 closure, forced through the House without any debate what- 
 ever ! 
 
 It is important to notice (see " Notes ") that in the divisions 
 on nearly all of the principal clauses there was a majority of 
 British members against the Government, but that they were over- 
 ridden by Nationalist votes. 
 
 In a short speech, July 27, before the guillotine fell on 
 the Committee stage, Mr. Chamberlain taunted the followers of 
 the Government with their abject submission : 
 
 " If the Prime Minister," he said, " called white they say it 
 is good, if he then calls black they say it is better." 
 
 The Unionists were disgusted at the complete and arbitrary 
 suppression of debate. Scenes of personal conflict between them 
 and the Nationalists took place, in which blows were freely given 
 and received, and, for a time, the House of Commons was a. 
 veritable pandemonium. 
 
 THIRD READING. 
 
 On the motion for the third reading, Mr. Courtney, now 
 Lord Courtney, moved the rejection of the Bill. After three 
 days' discussion the motion for rejection was closured (September 
 ist), and defeated by a majority of thirty- four of the whole 
 House. But there was a majority of twenty-three British mem- 
 bers against the Bill. If England and Wales were taken alone,, 
 the majority against the Government was forty-eight. In short,. 
 
 the measure was practically carried through all its stages in direct 
 opposition to the majority of British representatives. 
 
 The Bill was then sent to the Lords, who immediately threw 
 it out; and it is interesting to note that, of sixty-two Peers 
 created by Mr. Gladstone during his terms of office, only twenty- 
 four recorded their votes for the Bill. 
 
 One thing is noteworthy in connection with the proceedings 
 in Ireland. While the Bill was received with such determined 
 hostility by the Loyalists, there was altogether a lack of 
 enthusiasm on the part of those of the Irish people who were 
 supposed to be so favourable to it. There was no rejoicing when 
 the Bill finally passed through the Commons, and no excite- 
 ment or expression of indignation at its rejection by the Lords. 
 
 UNION OF HEARTS. 
 
 Many of the British public were in favour of Home Rule 
 because they were told, and they believed, that under it Ireland 
 would settle down in peace and contentment, and that "the 
 eternal Irish question " would be settled.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 11 
 
 The tactics of the Nationalists, when speaking to English 
 audiences, are to show that Home Rule would turn the Irish 
 into a loyal people. Mr. Gladstone asserted, and no doubt 
 believed, that the " union of hearts " would be secured, and that 
 what he called the " Irish Demand " would be satisfied by his 
 Home Rule Bill. These hopes and expectations, however, were 
 utterly delusive. 
 
 Mr. John Redmond, in his speech on the third reading of 
 the 1893 Bill, said: 
 
 " As the Bill stands no man in his senses can regard it as a 
 full and satisfactory settlement of the Irish question. The 
 word provisional so to speak has been stamped in red ink across 
 every page of the Bill, and if he were asked to accept it as a 
 final settlement he should feel bound to vote against the second 
 reading. He recognised," he said, " that the Bill was offered 
 as a compromise and accepted as such," and added, " that Eng- 
 land had no right to ask from Irish members any guarantee of 
 finality in its acceptance." 
 
 Mr. Joseph Devlin, M.P., one of Mr. Redmond's chief 
 lieutenants, now secretary of the United Irish League, in a speech 
 in America, declared: 
 
 " I believe in the separation of Ireland from England, until 
 Ireland is as free as the air we breathe." 
 
 Again, Mr. T. M. Kettle, speaking at New York, after 
 referring to further demands, said: 
 
 " These are our tactics. If you are to take a fortress first 
 take the outworks." 
 
 In the face of these and a number of other like utterances, 
 it is mere folly to talk of the " union of hearts " or of regarding 
 Home Rule, as it has been put forward, as a settlement of the 
 Irish question. It is not a matter of satisfying the Irish people, 
 but of satisfying the American-Irish paymasters and supporters 
 of the Nationalist movement. ; 
 
 NEW GENERATION OF VOTERS. 
 
 Since the introduction of the previous two measures into 
 the House of Commons a new generation of voters has come into 
 public life, whose knowledge of the question is traditional, and 
 who are largely ignorant of the details and principles of these 
 measures. These new voters are liable to be misled by the 
 assurances given to them that Home Rule is only a question of 
 allowing the Irish to " manage their own affairs," of " dealing 
 with questions purely Irish," and other plausible statements of 
 a like kind. 
 
 The Irish already possess the same control of their local 
 affairs as the English and Scots have over theirs. They have 
 county councils, district councils, and other powers conferred on 
 them by the Irish Local Government Act passed by the Unionist 
 Party, 1898. Moreover, they had an annual grant of nearly 
 three-quarters of a million sterling to assist them in carrying out 
 that Act. Local government, however extended, means the
 
 12 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 administration of laws made by the Imperial Legislature : but 
 a Parliament sub-ordinate or co-ordinate can make laws 
 according to its will a difference which should always be borne 
 in mind. 
 
 As regards political powers, the Irish have about thirty 
 representatives in the House of Commons more than they are 
 entitled to. In addition to all this they have many advantages 
 which the British do not possess. They pay no rates for their 
 police except in Dublin and Belfast, where there is a rate levied 
 for a small portion of the cost of the extra police which are 
 necessary in these two cities. They pay no rates for the educa- 
 tion of their children, for prisons, reformatories, industrial 
 schools and other institutions. 
 
 Over and above all this are the vast sums voted by the Im- 
 perial Parliament to assist the Irish tenants to secure the free- 
 hold of their holdings, an advantage the English farmer seeks 
 for in vain. There are large grants for the promotion of light 
 railways, to the Congested Districts Board, to carry out the 
 Local Government Act of 1898, and for other purposes. In fact, 
 for some years past Ireland has been the most-favoured part of 
 the kingdom, and has only had to ask and have. The Imperial 
 Parliament has most willingly given this help for the develop- 
 ment of Ireland as being the poorer part of the kingdom, and 
 will continue to do so as long as the legislative union is main- 
 tained. Under Home Rule all these benefits would cease, as 
 the resources of Ireland itself could not possibly bear the cost 
 of them. There is satisfactory evidence to show that the Irish 
 people themselves recognise and appreciate the improvement in 
 their condition caused by this assistance. But on the part of 
 the Nationalist leaders there is neither thanks nor recognition. 
 
 A NEW IRELAND. 
 
 The dealings with Ireland in former days especially with 
 regard to the land form a dark page in English history; and, 
 though all injustice and tyranny have been fully remedied, it is 
 not surprising that the memory of them still rankles in the minds 
 of many of the Irish people. The Nationalists trade on these 
 memories. The political Irish mendicants in America, in order 
 to unbutton the pockets of their hearers, ignore the remedial 
 legislation which has taken place. They dwell on the evils of 
 the past as if they still existed, and represent Ireland as a 
 down-trodden country suffering unutterable wrongs under the 
 tyranny of British rule. Such statements as these are more 
 or less historically true, but as applied to the Ireland of recent 
 years they are shameful falsehoods. 
 
 Mr. T. W. Russell told the members of the Eighty Club 
 recently (1911) that the Ireland they were about to see was a very 
 different Ireland from that of the 'seventies and 'eighties. He 
 did not tell them that the improvements they saw were wholly 
 due to Unionist action.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 13 
 
 Since the time of the Home Rule Bills of 1886 and 1893, 
 the condition, social and economic, of Ireland has been alto- 
 gether changed by the remedial legislation which has taken place 
 in that country. This is shown by every test that can be applied. 
 By the increase of the textile, shipping, brewery and other 
 industries; by the rise in the assessment to the income-tax; by the 
 increase of deposits in the Post-Office and Trustee Savings Banks, 
 which have more than doubled, and of those in the joint stock 
 banks, which have increased 50 per cent.-; by the striking growth 
 of railway receipts; by the improvement in communication 
 through the building of light railways; by the vast development 
 of the external trade of Ireland in the form of exports mainly 
 to Great Britain; and, above all, by the steady improvement in 
 Ireland's great industry that of agriculture which is and must 
 be the mainstay of Irish prosperity. 
 
 By Mr. Wyndham's wise and statesmanlike Act of 1903 
 the land question was settled to the satisfaction of the 
 Irish people. Under the Land Purchase Acts the Imperial 
 Treasury has already advanced above seventy millions sterling, 
 and is liable for a total of 150 millions to enable the Irish tenants 
 to become their own landlords. Nearly 300,000 tenants have 
 been placed in this position, and the demand for Home Rule 
 has lessened to the degree that the operation of the Act has 
 increased. 
 
 A renewal of the plan of campaign for the extermination of 
 landlords is no longer possible now that farmers are their own 
 landlords. 
 
 The Nationalist leaders saw this hindrance to the Home 
 Rule movement with great anxiety, and they most willingly 
 assisted Mr. Birrell in passing the Land Bill of 1909, which has 
 effectually delayed, if not stopped for the time, the operation 
 of the Act of 1903. 
 
 At a convention held by different parties connected with 
 land, held in Dublin on October nth, this year (1911), a remark- 
 able event occurred. Tenant farmers most of them in name 
 at least, Nationalists who were still waiting to buy their 
 holdings, bitterly complained of the Act of 1909. They urged 
 the landlords present to induce their representatives in Parlia- 
 ment to do the best they could " to get the land purchase going 
 again." They were referred to their own Nationalist members, 
 who had full power to do so. But they replied: 
 
 " What is the use of going to them ? Every one knows that 
 they don't want purchase to go on." 
 
 Mr. Wm. O'Brien, on more than one occasion, has bitterly 
 upbraided "Messrs. Dillon, Birrell and Co.," for bringing about 
 this result by their Act of 1909. In a letter to the Times of 
 August 4th, 1911, Mr. O'Brien deals with what he calls the 
 " Birrell-cum-Dillon " Act, passed, as he says, " with the com- 
 plicity of Mr. Redmond's party." He declares that the process
 
 14 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 of converting Irish tenants into proprietors " has been almost done 
 to death by the Act of 1909," and adds 
 
 " that under the circumstances it is a joke scarcely worthy of 
 Mr. Birrell's happiest vein to represent to the guileless English 
 public that the progress of agrarian settlement is going merrily 
 ahead, knowing as he must that his own Act has knocked it 
 ruthlessly on the head." 
 
 The great improvement in agriculture, the outcome of the 
 system of ownerships created by the Unionist Land Act of 1903 ; 
 the operations under the Congested Districts Act, the Labourer's 
 Cottage Acts, the Local Government Act of 1898, and other 
 measures all carried out with lavish expenditure by the Imperial 
 Parliament have created a New Ireland, which is now one of the 
 most prosperous parts of the United Kingdom, and as far as the 
 common people are concerned probably more prosperous than 
 any other part. The people are better off, and their standard of 
 life and comfort has been raised. The miserable mud cabins are 
 disappearing. Tens of thousands of improved dwellings have 
 been erected, under the Cottage Acts, each cottage, with an acre 
 of land around it, and let at from 1/6 to 2/- a week rent. 
 
 As we have stated, to the degree these reforms have been 
 carried out the cry for Home Rule has become less and less heard. 
 
 There is one proof of this more convincing than any other. 
 It is that of the pocket. The Irish people, in spite of great 
 pressure on the part of the United Irish League, have practically 
 ceased giving any money support to the Nationalist agitation. 
 Mr. Redmond himself has to admit the fact. Speaking two 
 years ago, he states that though the Irish people are much better 
 off, and have plenty of money to spend on sports and other 
 things that interest them, it is discreditable that they will give 
 nothing to the Irish Parliamentary Fund, though they are well 
 able to do so. 
 
 At a meeting last year (1910), reported in the Dublin papers, 
 he said : 
 
 " I tell you here there is no reason why we should not be 
 perfectly frank the Irish Nationalist Party would have been 
 bankrupt in this election were it not for the success of Mr. T. 
 P. O'Connor's mission to America, which yielded 50,000 dollars." 
 
 These American dollars are forthcoming mainly from the 
 avowed enemies of England, in response to lying appeals made 
 through the Irish World by the notorious Patrick Ford of dyna- 
 mite fame, whom Mr. Redmond describes as the " grand old 
 veteran," who has done so much for Ireland. 
 
 It is a humiliating position for a British Government to be 
 threatened and coerced by a Nationalist faction that could not 
 exist without the money support of the enemies of pur country 
 over-sea. It would be the very depth of humiliation for the
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 15 
 
 British electors on both sides to tamely submit to the arrogant 
 threats recently uttered by the leader of that faction: 
 
 " We don't care," he said, " a snap of the finger for either 
 political party, for England or for any political leader. If they 
 refuse to do our will we can turn the Liberals out as easily as 
 we can reduce a Conservative Government to impotence. The 
 situation is ideal for our purpose." 
 
 In the same strain later on he declared: 
 
 " Whether the Liberals are sincere or not, we have got the 
 power to do it; we will make them toe the line." 
 
 The whole situation is one of bluff that would not be 
 tolerated for a moment in any other country in Europe, and 
 which a firm and patriotic Government in England would 
 speedily put an end to. But unfortunately we have a Govern- 
 'ment under whose rule the honour of Parliament is being 
 smirched, and the unity of the kingdom bartered away in an 
 underhand, skulking manner for the sake of place and power. 
 
 It was the sorry spectacle of this unholy alliance and its 
 object that caused, a short time ago, the uncontrollable outburst 
 of indignation in the House of Commons on the part of the 
 Unionists, when a Prime Minister of England was assailed by 
 loud and repeated cries of " Traitor ! " 
 
 THE REAL IRELAND. 
 
 The Irish are a lovable people, keen, witty and emotional. 
 Those of us who at intervals visit the country meet with unfailing 
 courtesy and kindness. The Irish are also an honest people if 
 let alone. The repayments by instalments of the advances made 
 under the Land Acts are most satisfactory, there being scarcely 
 -a defaulter. In spite of the infamous cruelties by which the 
 "No Rent" manifesto was enforced by the Irish Land League, 
 numbers of Irish farmers, at the risk of their lives, paid by 
 ^stealth the rents they owed. 
 
 The former discontent that existed among the Irish, and 
 which made them an easy prey to political agitators, was based 
 on the state of the land question, a question that was associated 
 in their minds with Home Rule. The position is now quite 
 ^changed. The question of the land being now settled to the 
 satisfaction of the Irish people, Home Rule is but little heard 
 ^of, and, as stated, financial support of it is not forthcoming. 
 
 Ireland is a striking illustration of the potent influence of 
 land tenure on the economic and social condition of every 
 (Country. Mr. Lecky clearly points this out: 
 
 " Land," he says, " being an irremovable property subject to 
 Government control, has always proved the best pledge of the 
 loyalty of its possessor, and its acquisition never fails to diffuse 
 through a disaffected class conservative and orderly habits " 
 ;(" History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century," Vol. i).
 
 16 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 It would be well if England, before it is too late, would 
 learn and profit by the lesson. 
 
 THE EIGHTY CLUB. 
 
 Recently (in September, 1911) the members of the " Eighty " 
 Club visited Ireland. These personally-conducted gentlemen 
 were welcomed to Ulster by bands of music playing the tune 
 of " A Nation Once Again," but those among them with any 
 historical knowledge must know that Ireland never was a nation. 
 It is difficult to see the use of their visit. Any information they 
 may have got will probably be useless, as they have given up 
 their private judgment and pledged themselves to support any 
 Home Rule Bill which the Government may decide to bring in. 
 As Sir Edward Carson points out, they are seeking for evidence 
 after having given their verdict. Some things, however, they 
 have seen which must have cast doubts on that verdict, though 
 few among them, on their return to England, will have the 
 courage and candour to admit it. They have seen proofs of the 
 determined opposition to Home Rule on the part of the loyalist 
 population of Ulster. The great demonstration at Craigavon, 
 which happened during this visit, was an indication of the 
 strength and nature of that opposition. 
 
 On the other hand, they have found no enthusiasm in favour 
 of Home Rule except on the part of the disloyal faction who are 
 engaged in a movement which is supported by funds contributed 
 by the over-sea enemies of our country, who have sworn " to 
 bring England to her knees " without which support the move- 
 ment they are advocating would collapse in a very short time. 
 Further, if these visitors had an open mind, and were sincere 
 in their desire for information, they would have to confess that 
 they had not discovered a single grievance in Ireland which was 
 not common to other parts of the nation. 
 
 When the " Eighty " Club arrived at Cork they received an 
 address signed by over 150 Protestant farmers. The address 
 stated that under the Irish land legislation, passed by a Unionist 
 Government, over one-half of the Irish farmers had been 
 transformed from tenants into prospective freeholders; that in 
 consequence the country had advanced in prosperity by leaps 
 and bounds; but that in order to preserve and complete this 
 prosperity it was essential to retain the connection and protection 
 of England. It declared that these benefits could not have been 
 secured under Home Rule, as an Irish Government could not find 
 funds to carry out the land purchase scheme. The address 
 concluded as follows: 
 
 " We ask you to use your great influence towards this desirable 
 end (the completion of land purchase), so that the present agita- 
 tion will cease and the majority of our countrymen will become 
 with us loyal subjects." " Complete the land purchase," said 
 one speaker, " and the demand for Home Rule will die out."
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL IT 
 
 Now agriculture is the largest and most important industry 
 in Ireland. The great bulk, two-thirds, of the population are 
 engaged in or connected with it, and on its prosperity the welfare 
 of the country depends. Surely some of the members of the 
 "Eighty " Club must be struck by the statements placed before 
 them, and see that that prosperity can be secured only by a 
 legislative union with the richer part of the kingdom, and must 
 decline under Home Rule. Looking, therefore, from the stand- 
 point of the good of Ireland, will the visitors on their return to 
 England either deny the facts placed before them or free them- 
 selves from party shackles and admit that the opinions they held 
 were premature, mistaken, and based on imperfect knowledge? 
 
 But the astute Nationalists were not slow to improve the 
 occasion of the " Eighty " Club visit by a display of modera- 
 tion, and by giving an impression that there was not much 
 opposition to Home Rule, and that Ulster was a secondary 
 consideration. Mr. Redmond, in his blandest manner, assured 
 these " innocents abroad " 
 
 " that all Ireland wanted was to be permitted to take her proper 
 place as a contented portion of the Empire." 
 
 The actions of the Nationalists show too well that this 
 smooth-spoken palaver about loyalty is mere trothless cant. 
 During the Boer War the news reached the House of Commons 
 one night of a defeat of our soldiers with heavy loss. That 
 disaster was welcomed with cheers of joy and exultation from 
 the Nationalist benches. The people of Great Britain, especially 
 those whose friends and relations were numbered among the 
 killed and wounded in that disastrous fight, will never forget 
 or forgive the brutal and unmanly conduct of the Redmondites 
 on the occasion referred to; nor will the British people generally 
 fail to take at their proper worth Nationalist expressions of 
 loyalty. 
 
 The hard-headed Ulster men, however, were not led away 
 by Mr. Redmond's blandishments, adopted for the occasion, or 
 deceived by the farce, however well played, that was placed 
 before them. They remember the arrogant demands, the threats 
 and warnings uttered by Mr. Redmond on so many previous 
 occasions, and which have never been retracted. They simply 
 ignored the visitors who had given a blind adhesion to a Govern- 
 ment which, for the sake of office, is under the control of the 
 Nationalists, who, in their turn, are at the beck of Mr. Patrick 
 Ford and the American-Irish. 
 
 They are quite aware of the danger of their position from the 
 fact that, though it is the first duty of the Government of a 
 civilised country to stand by and protect the loyal and law- 
 abiding part of the population, this country has for the moment 
 a Government which is ignoring that duty, and is practically 
 taking sides with a foreign-supported conspiracy against the 
 unity and integrity of the nation.
 
 18 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 THE NEXT HOME RULE BILL. 
 
 Recently (1911) Mr. Churchill said: 
 
 " We intend to pass Home Rule during this Parliament." 
 
 He did not state the nature and provisions of the measure 
 they intended thus to force into law. As on the previous two 
 occasions, constituencies are to be kept in the dark. They only 
 know that, whether they like it or not, a measure which is not 
 before the country, probably at the moment of writing not 
 even drafted, is to be forced through Parliament by the aid of 
 an accidental majority assisted by Nationalist votes. 
 
 Mr. Birrell, however, speaking at Oxford in May, 1911, 
 informed us that their Home Rule Bill would be like Mr. 
 Gladstone's Bill of 1893, subject to such alterations and modifica- 
 tions as time had shown to be wise. 
 
 But it is not to Mr. Birrell that we must look for information, 
 but to the leaders of the Nationalists, who are masters of the 
 situation. Mr. Condon, M.P., speaking in February, 1911, 
 said : 
 
 " I tell you with authority and knowledge that the coming 
 Home Rule Bill will be a broader and more generous measure 
 than the Bill of 1886 or of 1893." 
 
 At a meeting of the United Irish League this year (1911) the 
 following resolution was passed: 
 
 " That no settlement of the Irish question will be acceptable 
 which does not confer on the Irish people the right of full self- 
 government through an Irish Nationalist Parliament with an 
 Executive responsible thereto." 
 
 This resolution embodies the minimum demand which Mr. 
 Redmond has made over and over again. 
 
 " Less than that," he says, " we will not accept " ; 
 
 and later on he adds: 
 
 " Get this first, and then ask for more." 
 
 In almost brutal language, with the air of a conquerer, he 
 states his intention to make the Government " toe the line," and 
 yield to his demands. At the last two general elections Radical 
 candidates succeeded in keeping Home Rule in the background, 
 or in mixing it up with other questions, and no doubt this plan 
 will be adopted by Home Rulers during the coming campaign. 
 But this policy of concealment and evasion cannot long be con- 
 tinued, as there is little doubt that the Government will be 
 obliged to produce their promised Bill early in 1912, and it is 
 then their troubles will be acute.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 19 
 
 It is now (191 1) eighteen years since the 1893 Bill was intro- 
 duced. The difficulties which surrounded that measure have been 
 enormously increased by the legislative improvements in Ireland, 
 the lessened demand for Home Rule, the enormous liability which 
 has been incurred by the Imperial Exchequer in the interests of 
 the Irish farmer, and the liability for the payment of Irish old- 
 age pensions, and by other legislation already referred to. If 
 the National Insurance Bill becomes law, another heavy burden 
 would be laid on an already over-weighted Irish Government. 
 Home Rule in the abstract is one thing, but in the concrete form 
 of a Bill it is quite another matter. There are many perplexing 
 questions that will have to be solved, and the solution of which 
 in the Bill will probably be of such a kind as to prevent many 
 of the British public, who now shout for Home Rule, from 
 agreeing to it. 
 
 The financial arrangements, showing whether the cost of 
 Home Rule is to be borne by the Irish who desire it, or is to 
 come out of the pockets of the British taxpayer ; the question of 
 the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament; of the retention of 
 Irish members at Westminster; and the position of Ulster, will 
 all have to be dealt with by definite provisions in the Bill. 
 
 SUPREMACY OF THE IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. 
 
 In Committee Mr. Bartley (see " Notes," Page 37) moved an 
 amendment to the first clause in the last Home Rule Bill, asking 
 that it should be stated in the clause that " the Irish Legislature 
 should be subordinate to the Imperial Parliament," so that it 
 might be in agreement with what all Gladstonian members pro- 
 fessed to desire. 
 
 The Nationalists resisted the amendment, and declared the 
 Irish Parliament should be subject only to the vote of the 
 Crown. The amendment was defeated by a majority of thirty- 
 five. But the votes of British members showed a majority of 
 eighteen against the Government. 
 
 It was abundantly shown during the debates in Committee 
 that no matter what declarations were made in the preamble or 
 in the clauses of the Bill with regard to supremacy, all safe- 
 guards were worthless so long as there existed an Irish Executive 
 responsible only to the Irish Parliament. An Executive so 
 appointed would be far more important and dangerous than the 
 Parliament itself. Even in Grattan's Parliament the Execu- 
 tive was not responsible to the Irish Legislature. The proposed 
 Executive would have the appointment and command of the 
 police and every other officer to carry out its decrees, against 
 which there would be no appeal. It would appoint the Paymaster- 
 General, who would do nothing and pay nothing except by the 
 order of his superiors.
 
 20 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Under such an arrangement it would pass the wit of man 
 to frame a provision to secure the supremacy of the Imperial 
 Parliament. It would mean separation or worse than separation, 
 because the British Parliament would retain vast responsibilities 
 and no power. 
 
 Sir Henry James, in a conclusive speech, declared that : 
 " We should have no power to defeat the errors of an Irish 
 Parliament, and the defaults of an Irish Executive, except by 
 force of arms." 
 
 It was contended that the supremacy of the Irish Parlia- 
 ment was guaranteed by the powers conferred on the Exchequer 
 Judges, but the question was asked, but no answer given, how, 
 with an Irish Executive responsible only to the Irish Legislature, 
 could any decisions and verdicts of Judges against the Govern- 
 ment, be carried out ? 
 
 Mr. Asquith made a remarkable and definite statement on 
 this head. " It is taxing our incredulity," he said, " to say that 
 supremacy is not secured, when we have reserved under the Bill 
 complete and absolute control of the military and naval forces, 
 and that a power so equipped will not be able to enforce to the 
 last extent any law which the Imperial Parliament may pass." 
 All this is true, but it means armed intervention and civil war ! 
 
 On every stage of the controversy every impartial man 
 should ask himself why on what grounds should all these 
 difficulties and dangers be incurred ? 
 
 FINANCIAL. 
 
 The financial proposals in the Home Rule Bill of 1893 were 
 very complicated, and were changed several times during the 
 progress of the measure. It was admitted on all hands that the 
 increased expenses under Home Rule would be such as to make 
 it impossible for an Irish Government to pay its way without 
 British help, and it certainly would not be able to raise money 
 on credit. The cost of the police, of old-age pensions, public 
 works, schools, prisons, asylums, reformatories, grants in aid 
 of rates, and other liabilities amounting to about five millions 
 sterling per annum, now paid out of the Imperial Exchequer, 
 would have to be paid by the Irish Government. 
 
 In 1886 Mr. Gladstone held that the proportion to be paid 
 by Ireland was one-fifteenth of the whole Imperial revenue, but 
 he afterwards fixed the contribution at one-twenty-fifth. 
 
 The late Lord Wolverhampton, then Sir Henry Fowler, got 
 over the difficulty by declaring that : " The English people would 
 not reject Home Rule on the miserable consideration of s. d."
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 21 
 
 Altogether, the debates revealed the utter confusion of the 
 pecuniary arrangements under the Bill, and showed that, unless 
 Ireland was to be bankrupt and ruined, Home Rule was im- 
 possible from the financial point of view alone. With two 
 Exchequers independent of one another, a financial mess must 
 ensue. All this the people of the " real Ireland " are beginning 
 to see; and it should be the duty of the Unionist Party both in 
 Great Britain and Ireland to fully explain. 
 
 Amid all the ambiguity of the financial proposals in the 
 1893 Bill, one thing was clear that a heavy initial sum would 
 have to be granted by the British Exchequer for setting up Home 
 Rule, and a substantial subsidy for keeping it going. Mr. 
 Birrell, speaking at Oxford on May 3, 191 1, said that 
 
 " the Government were engaged in a searching actuarial inquiry 
 to find out the financial position, and a new scheme would have 
 to be devised if Home Rule were to have any chance of success, 
 and he thought it would be found possible to make permanent 
 proposals which would not be open to the charge of being 
 impossible or absurd. In any case, he thought it would be a 
 tight fit." 
 
 In a later speech at Ilfracombe he told us that the financial 
 question would be dealt with in no niggardly spirit. Mr. Edgar 
 Crammond, in a masterly article in the Nineteenth Century, 
 for October, 1911, shows, from close calculations made, that 
 Ireland ought to pay at least 5 per cent, of the cost of the Army, 
 Navy and National Debt, which would amount to five millions 
 sterling a year a sum which is considerably more than Mr. 
 Gladstone proposed in his Bills of 1886 and 1893. 
 
 In consequence, however, of all the heavy charges now borne 
 by the Imperial Government, the Irish Chancellor of the Ex- 
 chequer would find himself with a heavy deficiency instead of a 
 surplus, a deficiency estimated at many millions sterling which 
 would have to be made good every year out of the pockets of 
 the British taxpayer. 
 
 It will be interesting to see how in the coming Home Rule 
 Bill this financial difficulty is dealt with. The British taxpayer 
 will probably say that if the Irish want Home Rule they must 
 pay for it, and that he will not consent to the breaking up of the 
 kingdom, much less paying the cost of doing it. 
 
 RETENTION OF IRISH MEMBERS. 
 
 One of the most serious questions of all connected with 
 Home Rule is that of the retention of Irish members at West- 
 minster. The public will wait with the greatest interest to see 
 how it is dealt with in the coming Bill. In the 1886 Bill as it 
 was introduced the Irish were excluded from the Imperial 
 Parliament. The Unionists opposed this, as it meant separation
 
 22 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 and nothing else. Though the retention of the Irish was fraught 
 with difficulty it was at least a symbol of the supremacy of the 
 Imperial Parliament. In the Bill of 1893 it was provided that 
 eighty Irish members should sit at Westminster, but they were 
 not to vote on British affairs. 
 
 This was described as the " in and out " method. Under it 
 a British Government might find itself through the Irish vote 
 in a majority to-day and in a minority to-morrow. In the debate 
 the utter absurdity and impracticability of the plan was shown 
 up by many amusing incidents. Mr. Chamberlain declared, 
 amidst cheers, that if such a childish scheme had been proposed 
 by any one except Mr. Gladstone it would be laughed out of the 
 House in a single night. The proposal was so riddled with 
 ridicule which no one attempted to answer that Mr. Gladstone 
 was compelled to abandon it. 
 
 On July 1 2th he announced his decision to give the eighty 
 Irish members power to vote on Bills, resolutions, motions and 
 all other subjects. Mr. Gladstone made a long speech with 
 obscure arguments in defence of this alteration. He admitted 
 the difficulty and anomaly, but concluded with the decision that 
 unlimited voting was the only method the Government could 
 carry, and to which the House was inclined. 
 
 It was thus decided that the Irish should have complete 
 control of their own affairs, and at the same time control of the 
 affairs of Great Britain ! The Unionists strongly resented this 
 alteration, made suddenly and without warning. Mr. John 
 Morley now Lord Morley speaking on the 1886 Bill, said: 
 " You may depend upon it that there is nothing which can pre- 
 vent the Irish, if they are retained at Westminster, from being 
 the masters and arbiters of British policy, and of the rise and 
 fall of the British administration." 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain quoted Mr. Gladstone's speech at Man- 
 chester, June 25th, 1886, in which he said: 
 
 " I will not be a party to a legislative body to manage Irish 
 concerns and at the same time to have Irish members in Lon- 
 don acting and voting on English and Scotch questions." 
 
 Yet this very provision was inserted in the Bill of 1893 ! 
 Several of the Government's supporters rebelled against this 
 ridiculous proposal. One of the most prominent declared: 
 
 " It is no longer simply a measure to give self-government 
 to Ireland, but it becomes a proposal to take away self-govern- 
 ment from Great Britain. . . . It is putting Great Britain 
 under the hoof of Ireland." 
 
 Opposition to the change was, however, all in vain. The 
 majority of Mr. Gladstone's followers had lost all independence, 
 and were ready to vote for anything he proposed. Amidst 
 unmannerly interruptions on the part of the Irish the closure was
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 23 
 
 moved, and the question that the eighty Irish members should 
 have unlimited powers of voting was carried with a Government 
 majority of the whole House, but with a British majority of 
 thirty-four against it. 
 
 But the exclusion of Irish members from Westminster is 
 equally difficult and impracticable. It would carry with it, as 
 a logical right, the control by the Irish Parliament of the excise 
 and customs as Mr. Gladstone originally proposed to give. 
 Under exclusion no other arrangement would be possible, as it 
 was evident that a British Parliament could not lay taxes and 
 levy duties in Ireland without the Irish members being present to 
 vote. This would be taxation without representation, and would 
 inevitably lead to fresh troubles and complications. The Irish 
 Parliament would insist, and under the circumstances would 
 justly insist, on the control of the excise and customs, and would 
 undoubtedly succeed in getting it. 
 
 In the consideration of all these difficulties it must be 
 constantly borne in mind that by the establishment of an Irish 
 Executive responsible to an Irish Legislature alone, the Imperial 
 Parliament would surrender all control over the Irish Legislature. 
 It would have no power left, except that of force, to carry out its 
 views. It is true there would remain the veto of the Crown, but 
 that need not be argued. 
 
 ULSTER. 
 
 If there were no other dangers in the way of the coalition 
 Government, Ulster is the rock on which it would split. Ulster 
 is the most prosperous and flourishing province in Ireland. Of 
 the ports in the United Kingdom Belfast has grown to be the 
 third in importance. By the remarkable activity, enterprise and 
 industry of its inhabitants, Belfast has established manufactures 
 of various kinds, textile, engineering, shipping, tobacco, ship- 
 building, etc., which have grown into undertakings of world- 
 wide fame. 
 
 Belfast has the largest shipbuilding establishment in the 
 world, employing above 14, OCX) persons, whose wages amount to 
 25,000 a week. 
 
 Two tobacco firms alone in the city pay about if millions per 
 annum in the form of duty. All these industries have grown 
 under the protection of the Imperial Parliament, and it is easily 
 understood how Ulster objects to be placed by force under a 
 Dublin Parliament, elected by the influence of the priesthood, 
 with Messrs. Dillon, Redmond and Devlin as managing directors. 
 
 The people of Ulster have declared that they will not have 
 Home Rule of any kind on any terms; and that they will not 
 obey the laws passed, or pay the taxes imposed by an Irish 
 Parliament one in which they would have no confidence, and in
 
 24 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 which also they would be in a hopeless minority. They assert 
 their right to remain, and their determination to remain under 
 the Imperial Parliament, whose laws know no distinction of class 
 or creed. 
 
 In 1892 an appeal was sent to British Nonconformists by 
 their Irish brethren, strongly deprecating Home Rule, and 
 saying: 
 
 " We do not believe that any guarantees moral or material 
 could be devised which would safeguard the rights of minorities 
 against the encroachments of a Roman Catholic majority en- 
 dowed with legislative and executive powers." 
 
 Their position is fortified by the utterance of Cardinal 
 Logue, who said: 
 
 " Of course, I am aware the doctrine has been preached in 
 a very high quarter that a man can vote as he pleases, but that 
 is a doctrine which Catholics can not hold." 
 
 This seems to confirm the statement of the Ulster Protestants, 
 that " the priest commands the people of his flock." 
 
 The loyalists do not forget the threatenings as to what will 
 happen to them when the Nationalists come into power. 
 
 " I tell the people," said Mr. Dillon," that the time is close 
 at hand when the police will be our servants. When we come 
 out of the struggle we will remember who were the people's 
 friends and who are the people's enemies, and deal out our 
 rewards to the one and our punishments to the other." 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain quoted these threats in the House of 
 Commons, and Mr. Dillon tried to excuse himself by saying that 
 they were uttered in moments of indignation at what he called 
 the " Mitchelstown murders." But Mr. Chamberlain showed that 
 these so-called murders took place in 1887, while the threats were 
 uttered in 1886, twelve months before! 
 
 The loyalists are told that they may now trust the 
 Nationalists, but the crime, tyranny, moonlighting, boycotting, 
 and other outrages on innocent persons which have accompanied 
 Nationalist agitations, forbid any such trust as an act of criminal 
 folly. We have only to read the Irish newspapers to see that 
 the United Irish League is still active in molesting and injuring 
 those who refuse to do its behests. If its warnings and threats 
 are not sufficient sterner methods are adopted, and its victims are 
 subject to violence and outrage. 
 
 In the address presented to the " Eighty " Club, at Cork, it 
 was stated that 
 
 " the Unionists in this county pay rates altogether out of 
 proportion to their numbers, yet they and their children are 
 excluded from nearly all the appointments made by the county 
 and district councils."
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 25 
 
 Complaints were made in the address of grievances attributed 
 to the Nationalist power in the local government. Members of 
 the deputation brought forward concrete cases of the shameful 
 boycotting of loyalists which was still going on in the county. 
 
 The Home Rule Party profess to regard the determined 
 opposition of Ulster as mere boasting. Mr. Bryce urged the 
 House to take no notice of Ulster or her bluster. Sir George 
 Trevelyan, referring to Ulster's threats of resistance, said he 
 attached little importance to it. 
 
 " I am not afraid," he said, " of civil war in the least. These 
 spouters in the North will not fight." 
 
 Mr. Redmond declared that the Protestants who would not 
 accept Home Rule " must be overborne with the strong hand." 
 
 But the Ulster people hold the key of the position. Against 
 their consent no system of Home Rule, if passed, could be put 
 into successful operation. Any attempt to coerce them by an 
 Irish Government would end in defeat, and any proposal on the 
 part of an Imperial Government to send British troops to assist 
 in coercing them would be universally denounced. 
 
 The Ulster people have begun the campaign in earnest. 
 They have elected as their leader Sir Edward Carson, a man 
 who has in a marked degree all the essential qualities of leader- 
 ship. His recent (October, 1911) speech, free from all ambiguity 
 or tinge of compromise, is vigorous and convincing, and inspires 
 his followers with spirit and determination. Sir Edward, in the 
 debate, August gth, 1911, declared that: 
 
 " The Government were trying to pass Home Rule without 
 submitting it to the electors of the United Kingdom, to pass it by 
 a pure act of violence. The Government act of force would 
 be resisted by force, and those who resisted would have con- 
 stitutional right on their side." 
 
 The Protestant religious bodies in Ireland were unanimously 
 against the Home Rule Bill of 1893. Meetings of Congrega- 
 tionalists, Wesleyans and other bodies passed resolutions against 
 it, declaring that " their civil and religious liberties would not be 
 safe." 
 
 In Scotland the Established Church, Free Church and 
 Presbyterian Church sent petitions and copies of resolutions 
 against it. 
 
 Above 1,200 delegates (as already mentioned) from Irish 
 loyalist societies came over to express their determination not to 
 have Home Rule. They stated that out of 621 ministers of the 
 Irish non-Episcopalian Churches nearly all had been Liberals, 
 and that not one would follow Mr. Gladstone in his Home Rule 
 policy.
 
 26 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 In 1893 the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, 
 Ireland, passed a strong resolution against a Parliament 
 in Dublin. The General Synod of the Protestant Episcopalian 
 Church in Ireland denounced the proposal for a separate legisla- 
 ture. A solemn League and Covenant for Ulster was formed to 
 resist Irish Nationalist government. 
 
 There is no reason to suppose that these Protestant Churches 
 are less strongly opposed to Home Rule now than they were in 
 1886 and 1893. 
 
 There is every reason for their distrust. In Committee on 
 the Home Rule Bill of 1893 an amendment was moved on June 
 1 2th to remove from the Irish Parliament " the power of repealing 
 or amending any law at present in existence, which gives legal 
 effect to the rights and ceremonies performed by any Protestant 
 Church." Mr. Gladstone and the Nationalists spoke against 
 the amendment, and it was defeated by a majority of thirty-four. 
 
 It has been proposed as a solution of the difficulty that 
 Ulster should have a separate Parliament, but the Irish loyalists 
 are not confined to Ulster. They are to be found all over 
 Ireland. Above 127,000 persons, living in the three Southern 
 Provinces, signed a petition against the Bill of 1893. The 
 avowed loyalists comprise persons of all classes and creeds 
 Catholic and Protestant. If to these were added those who for 
 good reasons dare not avow themselves as loyalists it. would 
 probably be found that more than one-half the population of the 
 Island either did not ask for Home Rule or were actively against 
 it. 
 
 But the relative numbers in Ireland are beside the mark. It 
 is a democratic principle that the majority should govern, but 
 it should be a majority of the whole country and not of a part of 
 it. The fact is that the Nationalist leaders of about two and 
 a-half millions of people in Ireland (a large portion of them 
 doubtful followers) are seeking by force to override the opinions 
 of the majority of the forty-five millions in the United Kingdom. 
 These opinions were fully expressed in the various stages of the 
 1893 Bill. Though the second reading was carried by a majority 
 of the whole House the majority of British votes was against 
 it. In nearly all the important divisions on the Bill in Com- 
 mittee there was an adverse British majority, while on the third 
 reading, if British Members only were reckoned, the Bill was 
 defeated by a considerable majority. 
 
 It remains to be seen what the Nonconformists on this side 
 the Channel will do in this crisis. Unfortunately the "Noncon- 
 formist conscience" has of late years been more or less governed 
 by party politics, to the great injury of Nonconformity itself. 
 It is to be feared, however, that the militant Nonconformists 
 will be induced by the promised bribe of Welsh Disestab- 
 lishment to vote for Home Rule ; but it is scarcely credible that
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 27 
 
 the great body of thoughtful Dissenters in Great Britain who put 
 their religious principles first will be deaf to the urgent appeals 
 made to them by their brethren in Ireland. 
 
 MR. J. REDMOND. 
 
 Mr. J. Redmond is a very pleasant personality, a most able 
 man, and a master of rhetorical oratory. He is most clever in 
 adapting his speeches to the audience which he happens to be 
 addressing. His utterances in - Great Britain are quite different 
 from those he gives in Ireland or America. His recent (191 1) speech 
 in Manchester was a masterpiece of seductive diplomacy. He 
 disclaimed any intention of smuggling a Home Rule Bill into 
 law, and declared that they courted the fullest and freest 
 discussion : that they entered on that discussion with a 
 passionate desire for a complete reconciliation with England and 
 the Empire ; that they only wanted a subordinate Parliament for 
 the management of Irish affairs, subject always to the continued 
 supremacy of the Imperial Parliament at Westminster. He in- 
 vited any one who 
 
 " had any doubt on the question to make that supremacy as 
 effective as he liked by the terms of the Bill which he said 
 would be passed by an overwhelming majority in the House of 
 Commons and become law during the present Parliament." 
 
 This is one of his two voices. His other voice is heard when 
 he demands an Irish Parliament with powers like those possessed 
 by the Colonial Legislatures that is practical independence. 
 This other voice is also heard when he is in Ireland. For 
 example, a month before his Manchester speech, he addressed the 
 Gaelic League in Ireland as follows: 
 
 " We have done what we could for the Gaelic League in 
 Parliament, and the ideals of the Gaelic League are our ideals. 
 We will struggle for them in the future. These ideals will be 
 realised when Ireland will not only be self-governed, but self- 
 governed not as a province of a foreign country." 
 
 Mr. Redmond contents himself with high-sounding 
 generalities about Home Rule. On no occasion does he go into 
 particulars and details of the measure in which the " ideals " to 
 which he refers are to be realised. For those we must " wait and 
 see." 
 
 Mr. Redmond, however, is not a free agent, but is between 
 two fires. On the one hand he has to satisfy the people on this 
 side the Channel, and on the other hand he has to meet the 
 demands of the United Irish League and the secret societies in 
 Ireland. The most formidable of these secret societies is the 
 " Ancient Order of Hibernians," called by Mr. Wm. O'Brien the 
 " Molly Maguires." It is composed entirely of Catholics, and 
 noted for its hatred to England. It has Mr. Devlin, M.P., as its 
 chief, who is said to be the most secretly powerful man among 
 the Nationalists.
 
 28 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Above all, Mr. Redmond must satisfy his supporters in 
 America. The object of all the societies referred to is not the 
 good of Ireland but the defeat and humiliation of this country. 
 They will narrowly watch the concessions made by Mr. Redmond 
 in Committee on the Home Rule Bill, and if they hinder their 
 object they will denounce and depose him from the leadership. 
 
 Besides the above Mr. Redmond has made similar soothing 
 statements on a former occasion. During the passing of the 
 Irish Local Government Act of 1898 through the House he 
 declared that the Nationalists would use all their powers and 
 influence to have the Act worked in the spirit of tolerance to all 
 classes and creeds. He promised the minority a generous share 
 of representation on the bodies created by the new Act. But 
 these assurances have been proved to be worthless. Out of 719 
 County Councillors in the three provinces outside Ulster, only 
 sixteen are Unionists. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 The fight over the Home Rule question is now beginning. 
 We are entering on the old struggle, which will not be carried 
 on with " velvet gloves." Appeals will be made to the con- 
 stituencies of Great Britain, without whose consent, in spite of 
 the Veto Act, no Home Rule Bill for Ireland can become or re- 
 main law. 
 
 The Government and their Nationalist taskmasters have 
 the intention of passing their Irish measure without consulting, 
 and behind the backs of, the British electors. But even under the 
 Veto Act it will take them two years to do this. During that 
 time much will happen. British opinion, after all, is a force 
 which during the interval will manifest itself in bye-elections, by 
 pressure on representatives in Parliament, and by other ways 
 altogether in such a manner as to make it irresistible. It is a 
 British question far more than it is -an Irish one. The 
 Nationalists, with the exception of Mr. Wm. O'Brien and his 
 small following, have throughout the contest never adopted the 
 policy of conciliation, but have relied on threats, warnings and 
 defiances. This shows how ignorant they are of the British 
 character. The British people as a whole, though they may 
 be slow in the consideration of a subject, are firm and tenacious 
 when they have once grasped it. We believe that they will con- 
 sider and settle the question on its merits, and will not be 
 coerced by a bubble conspiracy now become a mere imposture 
 to adopt a system which Mr. Gladstone once declared would 
 make us ridiculous in the sight of all mankind. 
 
 Mr. Asquith, in his attempt to carry Home Rule, is reckoning 
 without his host. He is not likely to succeed where the greatest 
 of Liberal leaders, under far more favourable circumstances, so 
 completely failed. 
 
 To sum up the whole matter, it would be safe to predict that 
 there will be no Parliament established on College Green. 
 
 " The enterprise is sick"
 
 29 
 
 NOTES ON THE 
 1893 HOME RULE BILL 
 
 (Reprinted from "THE RURAL WORLD," 1893.) 
 
 As we have had so many enquiries regarding the Home Rule 
 Bill, and as there appears to be a very common misunderstanding 
 or ignorance in many minds concerning its provisions, we have 
 thought it well to furnish our readers with an account of the 
 House of Commons proceedings upon the measure. 
 
 The question of Home Rule has been before the constituencies 
 for the past six years, but no definite meaning was given to it. 
 Home Rule is a phrase which might mean anything until 
 explained. It might be simply local government as we have it 
 in our counties, or a real Parliament as it exists in the Colonies. 
 During the elections Gladstonian candidates kept it and its 
 meaning in the background, and relied for success on promises of 
 all kinds of legislation for the benefit of the people generally. 
 These candidates, in fact, knew really nothing as to what the 
 Bill was to be, for though Mr. Gladstone in preparing his Bill 
 was as we learn from Mr. Dillon in consultation and agree- 
 ment with Irish Nationalist members, yet he 
 
 NEVER TOOK THE BRITISH PEOPLE INTO HIS CONFIDENCE 
 
 by telling them anything whatever about it. At the meeting of 
 Parliament, however, in February last, concealment was no longer 
 possible, and the Home Rule Bill itself had to be laid before the 
 House and its provisions made known. The 
 
 BILL WAS INTRODUCED ON FEBRUARY 13th. 
 
 The House was crowded and excited almost beyond descrip- 
 tion, and Mr. Gladstone, in a powerful speech of two and a 
 quarter hours' duration, explained the Bill which he was asking 
 leave to bring in. 
 
 It was then seen that the proposals were to establish a Parlia- 
 ment in Dublin, nominally subordinate, but for all practical 
 purposes an independent one. The Irish Executive or Govern- 
 ment was to be free from the control of the Imperial Legislature 
 and responsible alone to the Irish Parliament. Though the Irish 
 were to have a Parliament of their own, they were also to have 
 eighty members in the British Parliament. The attention of the 
 House was much aroused at this announcement, because
 
 30 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 MR. GLADSTONE IN 1886 DECLARED 
 
 that " it passed the wit of man " to devise a scheme by which 
 Ireland should have a Parliament of its own and at the same time 
 retain Irish members in the present House of Commons. He 
 further stated at that time that he would be no party to such a 
 proceeding. 
 
 THE IRISH PARLIAMENT WAS TO BE COMPOSED OF TWO 
 
 CHAMBERS. 
 
 1. A Legislative Assembly of 103 members popularly 
 elected for five years, unless dissolution before that time. 
 
 2. A Legislative Council of forty-eight members, elected 
 by electors rated at 20 per annum and upwards (the number of 
 these electors in all Ireland is 170,000), and able to sit for eight 
 years. 
 
 Two Exchequer Judges were to be appointed by the Imperial 
 Government to decide on all financial questions and Imperial 
 matters referred to them. These judges, however, would have 
 no means whatever to enforce their decisions, as the whole Execu- 
 tive, including the humblest policeman, would be under the Irish 
 Parliament ! 
 
 As to the appointment of all other judges, they were to 
 remain as at present for six years, being, after that time, 
 appointed by and under the control of the Irish Parliament. 
 
 The Irish Constabulary was to remain under the Crown for a 
 time, but to be gradually abolished and a force under the Irish 
 Government was to be created in its place. 
 
 AS TO FINANCE, 
 
 it was proposed that the Customs that is, the duty received on 
 all articles consumed in Ireland subject to customs duties (tea, 
 tobacco, wines, etc.) should be collected and retained by the 
 Imperial Government, and that that should represent the share 
 to be paid by Ireland to the general expenses of the govern- 
 ment of the United Kingdom. 
 
 THESE CUSTOM DUTIES WERE EXPECTED TO REALISE, 
 
 after deducting expenses of collection, a net sum of 2,400,000. 
 This represented all that Ireland would have to pay ; but it is to 
 be noted that if the Imperial Parliament should reduce the duty 
 on tea, tobacco, or wines, then the Customs in Ireland would 
 amount to so much less, and the Irish Government would have 
 that much less to pay. 
 
 The Bill was so full of intricacies that it was felt to be im- 
 possible to fully analyse it until it was printed, and the full text 
 of it seen. Nevertheless, it was pointed out that there was no 
 provision for the protection of Ulster. It was shown that the 
 supremacy of Parliament was only named in an abstract way in
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 31 
 
 the preamble of the Bill, that it was therefore, useless; and that 
 it simply meant the same supremacy as the Imperial Parliament 
 has over the colonies. As a theory this " Colonial " supremacy 
 is undoubted. Parliament can, for example, legislate over the 
 heads of the Colonial Parliaments Canada, New South Wales, 
 Victoria, etc. and the Crown can veto any of their Acts. 
 
 It was shown, however, that this was a mere nominal 
 supremacy; that if the Imperial Parliament, or the Crown were 
 to exercise the right referred to, very little notice would be 
 taken of such action by the Colonial Legislatures; and that 
 Great Britain would have no power to give effect to her will 
 except by armed force, seeing that all the executive power in 
 each colony is in the hands of the Colonial Parliament. This 
 was the only sort of supremacy which the Imperial Parliament 
 would have over the Irish Legislature. 
 
 Speeches and addresses of Gladstonian candidates at the 
 general election were read to prove that no Bill of this kind was 
 ever contemplated, but that, on the contrary, it was declared by 
 most of these candidates that they would never support any 
 measure of Home Rule unless the Irish Legislature was without 
 doubt to be a subordinate one, unless the supremacy of the 
 Imperial Parliament was placed beyond question, and unless the 
 rights, liberties, and privileges of the minority in Ireland were 
 absolutely safeguarded. None of these conditions were fulfilled 
 in the Bill except in theory and on paper. Among the speeches 
 of Mr. Gladstone before his conversion to Home Rule was one 
 in which he said : 
 
 "WHY IS PARLIAMENT TO BE BROKEN UP?" 
 
 " What is it that Ireland has demanded from the Imperial Par- 
 liament, and. that the Imperial Parliament has refused ? The 
 Imperial Parliament has done for Ireland what it would have 
 scrupled to do for England and Scotland. Can any rational man 
 suppose that at this time of day, in this condition of the world, 
 we are going to disintegrate the great capital institutions of this 
 country for the purpose of making ourselves ridiculous in the 
 sight of all mankind ?" 
 
 These and all other utterances quoted were ignored : 
 THE GOVERNMENT HAD NO ANSWER TO MAKE. 
 
 As to the intentions of the Nationalist Party, the words of 
 Mr. J. Redmond were quoted from a recent article in the Nine- 
 teenth Century, in which he declared that he and his party would 
 not agree to any supremacy of the British Parliament over Irish 
 affairs. Reference was made to the words of 
 
 SIR GEORGE TREVELYAN, 
 
 the Secretary for Scotland, who, before his surrender to Home 
 Rule, said, in 1886, that he would sooner remain a private citizen 
 for the rest of his life than hand over the lives and liberties of 
 the law-abiding population in Ireland to a Parliament in which, 
 as he believed, Sheridan and Egan would find seats. Sir George
 
 32 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Trevelyan was challenged to say, as a Cabinet Minister in the 
 present Government, why he was a party to the present Bill. 
 Convincing arguments were used in the debate to show that the 
 new Parliament in Ireland would be 
 
 A NATIONALIST PARLIAMENT ELECTED UNDER 
 THE INFLUENCE OF THE PRIESTS; 
 
 that the loyal Protestant minority would under no circumstances 
 accept it; that they would not submit to be taxed and governed 
 by such a Parliament, in whose hands their dearest interests 
 would not be safe; and that to force such a Parliament on the 
 loyal population would be a crime of colossal magnitude. 
 
 The full text of Mr. Gladstone's speech of October 28th, 
 1 88 1, was quoted, in which he said: 
 
 " It is idle to talk of law, or order, or liberty, or religion, or 
 civilisation, if these gentlemen are to carry through the reckless 
 and chaotic schemes they have devised. Rapine is their first 
 object, but ra-pine is not their only object. It is perfectly true 
 that those gentlemen wish to march, through ra-pine, to the 
 disintegration and the dismemberment of the empire." 
 
 It was pointed out by the Ulster members that there were 
 good reasons why the loyal minority should not trust the Irish 
 Nationalists. They spoke of the Land League, of which the 
 Prime Minister had said that " crime dogged its footsteps," and 
 which Mr. Gladstone's own Attorney-General, now Mr. justice 
 Johnson, declared was " steeped to the lips in treason." It was 
 shown that the League 
 
 RULED IRELAND BY TERROR; 
 
 that it spared neither age nor sex in the exercise of its tyranny ; 
 that it started the plan of campaign, admitted by all to be a 
 movement of plunder and dishonesty; that by boycotting it 
 sought to trample out all freedom on the part of the individual ; 
 and that during the years of its rule no man or woman who dared 
 to assert the right to act honestly was free from its terrible 
 curse. 
 
 The Prime Minister told the Ulster members to have faith ; 
 but, with bitter memories of the past, how could they have faith 
 in the reformation of men who had expressed the intention of 
 punishing them when they got all the power into their own hands ? 
 
 It was further shown that the Irish Government, under the 
 Bill, would have the full control of the criminal law; that 
 
 THEY MIGHT RELEASE THE DYNAMITERS, 
 
 or take any steps with respect to the punishment or non-punish- 
 ment of crime which they chose. The Government's reply to this 
 was that there was an appeal to the Courts; but it was shown, and 
 could not be denied, that though Judges in an Appeal Court 
 might give a decision, there was no power whatever to carry that 
 decision out. All the executive power sheriffs, sub-sheriffs,
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 33 
 
 policemen would be under the nomination and pay of the Irish 
 Executive, and it was impossible to suppose that they would 
 enforce decrees against that Executive. 
 
 It was pointed out that there would be no security for the 
 payment of the annual sums due to the Imperial Exchequer for 
 advances made to Ireland on various accounts. At present large 
 sums of money were advanced to Ireland at low interest for 
 various improvements; but an Irish Government left to its own 
 resources would not be able to borrow money except at higher 
 interest (if it could borrow at all), and the consequence would be 
 that great schemes, so necessary for the material prosperity of 
 Ireland, would be checked, and that the great mass of the country 
 would suffer. 
 
 The Government were asked for explanations with regard 
 to educational matters in Ireland. At present, the national 
 education in that country is unsectarian, and it has regard for 
 the conscience of the Protestant minority. Under the Bill, it 
 appears that an Irish Parliament, established under Roman 
 Catholic dictation, could change all this, make the system 
 denominational, and 
 
 TAX THE PEOPLE, 
 
 including the Protestant population, for the purpose of Roman 
 Catholic schools, colleges, and universities. 
 
 The speeches of the Irish members were somewhat of a 
 defiant and impertinent character. Mr. Sexton was bold enough 
 to say that it was no longer a question between the people of 
 Ireland and the people of Great Britain, but that it was a ques- 
 tion between this Empire and the Irish race, amounting to twenty- 
 five millions of men scattered over the globe. In answer to this, 
 Mr. Sexton was assured that any threat of foreign dictation was 
 not likely to influence the British people. 
 
 Continual complaints were made by Unionist speakers that 
 the Government declined to answer any of the arguments, or 
 cases, placed before them for reply. They (the Government) 
 replied in generalities, declared that the Opposition were 
 animated by distrust of the Irish people, and that they them- 
 selves did not anticipate any of the difficulties named. To the 
 charge of the 
 
 DISGRACEFUL DESERTION OF THE LOYAL MINORITY 
 
 in Ireland, no answer was attempted further than to say that no 
 fear should be entertained that anything wrong would be done 
 by the Irish Parliament. 
 
 The whole debate was wound up by Mr. Gladstone, who, in 
 a brilliant speech, defended the Bill generally, avoided definite 
 replies to the points which had been raised by the Opposition, 
 and made light of apprehensions of the many dangers pointed 
 out as being involved in the Bill. The burden of his reply was 
 that the Irish Parliament must be trusted in respect to every 
 difficulty raised.
 
 34 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 On a division the second reading was carried by a majority 
 of forty-three. 
 
 SCENE IN THE HOUSE AFTER THE DIVISION. 
 
 At the announcement of the figures the scene in the House 
 was remarkable. The majority of the Gladstonians cheered 
 vociferously. The Nationalists were beside themselves with 
 enthusiasm. They waved their hats, some of them stood on the 
 benches, and all gave way to every demonstration. The Unionist 
 Opposition, however, were not disheartened. They felt that it 
 was the second reading of a Bill which attempted to force a new 
 constitution, not only on Ireland, but on Great Britain as well, 
 and to do this against the will of the British people by the 
 mere force of Irish votes. They were convinced that this could 
 not be carried out without a further appeal to the constituencies; 
 and many of the old experienced members were of opinion that 
 that scene marked the highest point which the Home Rule move- 
 ment was destined to attain, and that now, once understood, its 
 importance would decline, and the Bill be ultimately defeated. 
 
 THE BILL IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 THE DEBATE IN COMMITTEE IS GIVEN FROM DAY TO DAY; THE 
 MEANING OF EACH AMENDMENT IS EXPLAINED ; THE APPROXIMATE 
 TIME EACH AMENDMENT OCCUPIED IN DISCUSSION IS STATED, .AS 
 WELL AS THE PARTICULARS OF THE DIVISION ON IT. IN THIS 
 CONNECTION IT MUST BE REMEMBERED THAT IRELAND HAS BETWEEN 
 TWENTY AND THIRTY REPRESENTATIVES MORE THAN IT IS ENTITLED 
 TO. 
 
 In describing the debate on the first and second readings, it 
 was necessary to treat the Bill as a whole, and to deal generally 
 with its main provisions and principles. 
 
 It is only in Committee, however, that the real meaning and 
 scope of the measure can be disclosed. There are many points, 
 often reckoned as details, which are of the most vital importance 
 as affecting the happiness, comfort and liberty not only of 
 minorities, but of the people generally. Take, for instance, the 
 Habeas Corpus Act, the charter of the people's liberties, which 
 secures that any accused person shall be brought to trial with the 
 least possible delay. The power to suspend that Act is in the 
 United States (except for invasion or rebellion), and in the self- 
 governing Colonies strictly reserved to the central governments. 
 In the Home Rule Bill, however, that power is taken out of the 
 hands of the Imperial Legislature, and invested in the Irish 
 Government. 
 
 Take another example, that of factory legislation, which 
 so closely affects the health, comfort and hours of work of the 
 men, women and children of the industrial classes, and is applied 
 to all parts of the kingdom alike. There are very few trades 
 unions or labour organisations in Ireland to oppose any tamper- 
 ing with and altering these beneficial laws. It would be, there- 
 fore, unwise and dangerous to hand the power over of this
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 35 
 
 legislation to an Irish Government, which the Bill proposes to 
 do, and thus remove the operatives of Ireland from the pro- 
 tection of the Imperial Parliament. 
 
 We deal, therefore, with the Bill in Committee from day 
 to day, setting forth in as plain language as possible the meaning 
 both of the various clauses and sub-sections and of the amend- 
 ments moved in regard to them. 
 
 MONDAY, MAY 8th FIRST DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 Clause I. was as follows: 
 
 " On and after the appointed day there shall be in Ireland 
 a Legislature consisting of Her Majesty the Queen and of two 
 Houses the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly." 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain moved the postponement of the clause on 
 the ground that Clause 9, which rejated to the retention of Irish 
 members in the Imperial Parliament, should be first dealt with. 
 It was not known whether eighty or the whole 103 Irish members 
 were to be so retained; or whether they were to deal only with 
 Imperial legislation, or were to vote on all business before the 
 House, as at present. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone said they intended to propose the ninth clause 
 as it stood ; that is, to retain eighty members for special Imperial 
 business; but, when challenged by Mr. Balfour, he declined to 
 Bay that they intended to adhere to it, or to give any further 
 explanation. An extract from a speech by Mr. Gladstone after 
 the Home Rule Bill of 1886 was quoted as follows: 
 
 " I will never be a party to allowing the Irish members to 
 manage their own affairs in Dublin and at the same time to 
 come over here and manage British affairs." 
 
 It was contended that Clause 9 should be cleared up before 
 it could be possible to settle the character of the Legislature to be 
 set up by Clause I. The discussion on this clause was marked 
 by rude Irish interruptions, and on a division the amendment 
 was rejected. 
 
 The discussion lasted i hour 
 
 Government majority 57 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-repre- 
 sented 34 
 
 Mr. Darling (Deptford) moved an amendment to provide 
 that legislation by the proposed Dublin Parliament should not 
 impair, restrict, or alter the su-preme power and authority of the 
 Imperial Parliament in all matters, local and Imperial, and over 
 all persons in Great Britain and Ireland. 
 
 The object of this amendment was to make the supremacy 
 of the Imperial Parliament clear. That supremacy was only 
 named in the preamble (i.e., simply in the " introduction ") of the 
 Bill, and would be of no definite effect unless positively enacted 
 in a clause. In opposition to the amendment, the Government
 
 36 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 declared that the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament existed, 
 without stating it, not only in Ireland, but in all the colonies, 
 and they objected to any words defining that supremacy. 
 
 Sir Henry James pointed out that the object of the amend- 
 ment was to know if the supremacy was an admitted fact or not; 
 that it ought to be set forth in plain and distinct language; and 
 that it ought not to be put only in the preamble, which was not 
 an enacting -part of the Bill. It was contended by the Opposition 
 that no doubt, technically speaking, the Imperial Parliament was 
 supreme over Canada and over the colonies of Australia, but 
 that this was only a nominal supremacy, as it was evident that 
 the Imperial Parliament could not over-ride the Acts of the 
 Colonial Parliaments, and that if it attempted to do so no notice 
 would be taken of such action. If it was admitted that the 
 Imperial Parliament was to be supreme, why not make it so in an 
 effective manner ! 
 
 The Irish Nationalist members objected to the amendment. 
 The Government were hard pushed by the Unionists to consent 
 to it. It was urged that the electors were promised at the 
 general election that there should be no doubt about this matter, 
 and that the present amendment tested the sincerity and inde- 
 pendence of the Government. The debate on this vital question 
 was closured and the amendment rejected. 
 
 The discussion lasted 4 hours 
 
 Government majority 52 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-repre- 
 sented 2Q 
 
 Loud complaints were made that a debate on this important 
 subject was closured in so arbitrary a manner, and a motion to 
 report progress was made. It was pointed out that the Opposi- 
 tion, which composed nearly half the House of Commons, and 
 which represented a large majority of the electors in Great 
 Britain, were entitled to be heard. It was complained that the 
 Government had not met the arguments of their opponents, or 
 attempted to meet them, but had closed the debate by brute force. 
 The speakers were interrupted by the Nationalist members, and, 
 amid loud uproar, Mr. Chamberlain demanded to know whether 
 the Government had determined to carry the Home Rule Bill 
 without discussion, and at the dictation of Irish members. If 
 that was the case, he said, let them say so at once. After a 
 stormy discussion the motion to report progress was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted i hour 
 
 Government majority 42 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 19 
 
 British majority against the Government ... n
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 37 
 
 TUESDAY, MAY 9th SECOND DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause I. Continued.) 
 
 Mr. Bartley moved an amendment asserting that the Irish 
 Legislature should be subordinate to the Imperial Parliament. 
 It was repeated that nearly every Gladstonian candidate at the 
 general election declared that there should be no doubt as to the 
 subordinate character of any Irish Parliament which might be 
 established. The present amendment was moved to test the 
 Government on this matter. 
 
 The Nationalists objected to the amendment, contending 
 that the Irish Parliament should be subject only to the veto of the 
 Crown. 
 
 The Government were asked if that was the compact which 
 they had made with the Irish Nationalists; if so, it was evident 
 that the Irish Legislature was not to be a subordinate one, but 
 practically independent. 
 
 Mr. Balfour pointed out that the Government had absolutely 
 no arguments against the amendment, and that the subordinate 
 character of the Irish Legislature so much talked about was 
 not to be embodied in the Bill. The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 18 
 
 Mr. T. W. Russell moved to omit the second Chamber from 
 the Irish Parliament not from opposition to the principle of the 
 Chamber, but because the system of electing this Irish second 
 Chamber afforded no safeguards to the minority. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, MAY 10th THIRD DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause I. Continued.) 
 
 The consideration of Mr. Russell's amendment was con- 
 tinued. The Irish upper Chamber was, under the Bill, to be 
 chosen by electors rated at 20 and upwards. These would be 
 the small farmers who had cattle to be maimed, and rickyards 
 to be burned, who would be under the terrorism of the Irish Land 
 League, and who were of a class who would act completely under 
 the direction of the priests. It was pointed out that under the 
 proposals of the Bill if the two Irish Chambers could not agree 
 on a Bill, they were, after a certain time, to meet together, and 
 the majority of the whole body would then decide. Hence, it 
 was evident that the lower Chamber, being the more numerous, 
 would always eventually have their way, and that as a safeguard 
 the upper Chamber was simply a sham, and no protection at all 
 
 to the minority in Irelaa^ 
 
 3
 
 38 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Mr. Atherley-Jones, Mr. W. Saunders, and Dr. Wallace (all 
 Gladstonian members) ridiculed the proposition of this second 
 Chamber. Dr. Wallace said that this was a Bill " made to 
 pass." They knew, he said, that it would be thrown out by the 
 House of Lords, and their only chance of success was that they 
 should be able to rouse the country against the House of Lords ; 
 but they would never be able to do this by means of a Bill 
 " made to pass." Bills " made to pass " were very like razors that 
 were made to sell. They might succeed in passing them upon 
 the market, but the market would find them out. They would 
 never, he added, excite public enthusiasm by a shifty and patchy 
 Bill, in which the country would know that principles were sacri- 
 ficed to mere tactics. This important amendment was brought to 
 an end by the closure. 
 
 The discussion lasted 5 hours 
 
 Government majority 51 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 28 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 7 
 
 THURSDAY, MAY 11th FOURTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause 1. Continued.) 
 
 A motion was made " That Clause i stand -part of the Bill." 
 
 In discussing this motion, the Unionists contended that 
 there had been no necessity proved for a separate Legislature 
 for Ireland. The Unionists complained that the argument had 
 been all on one side, and that the Government had made no 
 reply ; that the Unionist arguments had been treated either with 
 silence or evasion of the points raised ; and that the followers 
 of the Government had swallowed everything proposed, in 
 opposition to all the pledges given at the general election. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain quoted as follows, from a speech of Mr. 
 Parnell's, at Ennis, on February 1st, 1891 : 
 
 "We have shown the world that Ireland now, as always, stands 
 fast to her claim to be sovereign within her own kingdom and 
 country ; that she refuses to admit any English veto ; that she 
 declines to obey the orders, so far as her own business is con- 
 cerned, of any Imperial or English Minister, taskmaster, or 
 dictator." 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain challenged the Irish Nationalists to say if 
 they had changed their opinions. He dared them to repeat in 
 the House speeches made outside. He further quoted from a 
 speech of the member for Cork City (Freeman's Journal, January 
 29th, 1892), as follows: 
 
 " I take it that we are all united in demanding that the Irish 
 Parliament, while it acts within its own province, shall be as 
 free from Imperial meddling as the Parliaments of Australia 
 or Canada."
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 39 
 
 He quoted, moreover, from a speech by Mr. Dillon (Mayo), 
 on December 6th, 1891, as follows: 
 
 " Then we will try Gladstone. If his Bill gives over the 
 Government of this country into the hands of the Nationalists 
 of this country as I believe it will our troubles and our 
 struggles will be over. . . . If it does not we shall go on 
 until we have wrung from the English Parliament a measure 
 of complete emancipation." 
 
 These were a few speeches, among many, which showed the 
 demands of the Irish Nationalists demands which they had 
 never altered. The Bill conceded those demands, and every 
 amendment to modify them had, so far, been resisted by the 
 Government, acting under Irish domination. 
 
 The Irish members were roused at being thus confronted with 
 their outside speeches. There was a great scene of disorder, the 
 Nationalist members showing their arrogant determination to 
 have their way. The members of the Government sat powerless. 
 The Ulster members wanted to speak on the motion, declaring 
 that as this was a Legislature to be created to govern them, they 
 had a right to show its oppressive character, and (it being now 
 nearly 12 o'clock, the end of the sitting) a motion was made to 
 report progress, in order that the discussion might be continued 
 next day. This motion was resisted by the Government, and 
 defeated by a majority of forty-four, when, it being midnight, 
 the discussion stood adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, MAY 12th FIFTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Discussion continued on the motion, " That Clause I. stand part 
 
 of the Bill.") 
 
 The Ulster members pointed out that this clause, which 
 established a Legislature for Ireland, was one to coerce the loyal 
 people of Ulster and other parts of Ireland, and to thrust them 
 out from the protection of the Imperial constitution ; that it 
 sought to fasten a hateful yoke on their necks; and that there 
 were to be nothing but paper safeguards for their rights, liberties 
 and privileges. 
 
 Sir Edward Reed (Gladstonian member for Cardiff) declared 
 that he had never been in favour of, and would never vote for, a 
 Bill that did not provide for the full control of the Irish Parlia- 
 ment by the Imperial Parliament; that that supremacy must be 
 provided for by means of a clear and distinct clause. 
 
 Unionist speakers were continually interrupted by Irish 
 Nationalists, and attempts were made, in the rudest and most 
 disorderly way, to stop them, and to interfere with the dis- 
 cussion, and uproarious scenes were witnessed in the House. 
 
 The debate on this vital clause, which raised the whole 
 question as to whether or no there should be a Parliament for 
 Ireland, was closured by the Government, though many others
 
 40 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 wished to s-peak on the question. The closure was carried by a 
 majority of forty-eight, and the motion " That Clause I. stand 
 part of the Bill " was forthwith passed. 
 
 The discussion lasted 8J hours 
 
 Government majority 42 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 19 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 12 
 
 Clause II. was as follows: 
 
 " With the exceptions and subject to the restrictions in this 
 Act mentioned, there shall be granted to the Irish Legislature 
 power to make laws for the -peace, order, and good government 
 of Ireland, in res-pect of matters exclusively relating to Ireland, 
 or some -part thereof." 
 
 This clause proposed to give into the hands of the Irish 
 Legislature the power to legislate on every subject except on those 
 named in the Bill. 
 
 Mr. Victor Cavendish moved the omission of the following 
 introductory words in the clause " With the exceptions and sub- 
 ject to the restrictions in this Act mentioned." 
 
 The effect of the amendment would be that instead of giving 
 everything into the hands of the Irish Legislature except certain 
 questions specially named, everything would be retained in the 
 hands of the Imperial Parliament, except certain questions which 
 were named and delegated to the Irish Legislature; that is to 
 say, that the subjects on which the Irish Parliament should be 
 empowered to legislate should be named in the Bill, and every- 
 thing else except those subjects retained by the Imperial Parlia- 
 ment, so that it might be clearly and strictly defined what the 
 Irish Legislature could and could not do. 
 
 This amendment was under discussion at midnight, when 
 the House adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, MAY 15th SIXTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (The discussion on Mr. Victor Cavendish's amendment to 
 Clause II. was continued.) 
 
 It was pointed out that in the case of Canada everything was 
 retained in the hands of the Federal Government, exce-pt those 
 measures which were delegated to the Provincial Parliaments; 
 and that it was due to the people of Great Britain that they 
 should know what really were the powers proposed to be granted 
 to the Irish Parliament. 
 
 Many instances were given of the difficulties which would 
 arise under the clause as it stood. To take one instance, the 
 subject of marriage and divorce was not named as an excepted 
 question, and would, therefore, be handed over to the Irish 
 Parliament. It would be a great hardship for the Protestant 
 population who valued their methods of proceeding with regard
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 41 
 
 to marriages, especially the right of civil marriage to be sub- 
 jected to laws which a Roman Catholic Parliament might pass on 
 the subject. 
 
 Mr. Storey, Gladstonian member for Sunderland, announced 
 his intention to vote for the amendment on the ground that it was 
 better and easier to proceed by way of delegation of subjects, and 
 to define the subjects delegated to an Irish Parliament, instead 
 of to give it power over every subject with the exception of certain 
 questions reserved . 
 
 The Irish members, however, opposed any concession, and 
 the Government could only say that the Irish Legislature could 
 be trusted to do what was right. The amendment was conse- 
 quently defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 3 hours 
 
 Government majority 47 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 24 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 5 
 
 TUESDAY, MAY 16th SEVENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause II. Continued.) 
 
 Mr. Brodrick, Guildford, Surrey, moved an amendment 
 giving power to the Queen upon the Address of both Houses of 
 the Imperial Parliament, to diminish or restrain any of the 
 powers granted to the Irish Legislature. 
 
 The object of the amendment was to enable the Imperial 
 Parliament to have a check over any unjust exercise of the powers 
 given to the Irish Legislature. It was pointed out that the new 
 Parliament would be a Catholic Parliament legislating for 
 Protestants a Nationalist Parliament legislating for the 
 Loyalist minority. If anything unjust were done towards 
 the minority by this Parliament there was no adequate means by 
 which a check could be applied. 
 
 The reply of the Government was that the Irish Parliament 
 must be trusted ! The Ulster members urged that the past action 
 of the Nationalist Party was not such as to give confidence to 
 the Ulster people, and that they should try to obtain all the safe- 
 guards and securities they could. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 56 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 33 
 
 Sir Henry James moved an amendment providing that, 
 "notwithstanding anything in this Act contained, the supreme 
 power and authority of the Parliament of the United Kingdom 
 of Great Britain and Ireland shall remain unaffected and un- 
 diminished over all persons, matters, and things within the 
 Queen's dominions."
 
 42 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 This raised the question of the supremacy of Parliament, 
 which at present was not contained in the enacting -part of the 
 Bill. Mr. Balfour urged that if the supremacy of Parliament 
 was to be a practical thing under the Bill they must insert 
 machinery to make it so. Up to this point it was a mere abstrac- 
 tion. The Bill contained only the same supremacy as Parliament 
 had over the Colonial Parliaments of Australia and Canada, 
 which, of course, was a mere paper one. 
 
 The Government attempted to get the amendment post- 
 poned. They promised to consider the matter at a later stage of 
 the Bill. It was contended, however, by the Opposition that 
 this was the place and time to affirm the supremacy of the Im- 
 perial Parliament if the Government meant it to be supreme. 
 
 The Irish members strongly opposed the amendment. They 
 were willing to put the question off to a subsequent clause; but 
 the Unionists declared that, after the utterances of the 
 Nationalists, there was no security if once they missed this 
 opportunity. Mr. Chamberlain quoted, among other Nationalist 
 statements, that of Mr. Redmond (Waterford), who said: 
 
 " The rights of the Imperial Parliament would remain intact ; 
 those rights would remain dormant so far as Irish affairs are 
 concerned. A Parliamentary compact would be entered into 
 binding the Imperial Parliament to leave those rights dormant." 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain pointed out, therefore, that if this Bill 
 once passed without a distinct declaration of supremacy, the 
 Nationalist Party would say, and would have a perfect right to 
 say, " You gave us this Constitution knowing that we said we 
 only accepted it on the understanding that your Imperial 
 supremacy would for ever remain dormant, and you sat silent 
 and allowed the Bill to pass." 
 
 He quoted another statement of Mr. Redmond's, in October, 
 1892, as follows: 
 
 " The power which, in the case of the Colonies, is harmless 
 because it is a dead-letter, would, in the case of Ireland, be a 
 reality, and would be a perpetual source of humiliation, of heart- 
 burning, and of danger. We therefore say that a formal com- 
 pact must be entered into that, while the Irish Parliament lasts, 
 it will be permitted sole and unfettered authority on all purely 
 Irish affairs, free from interference by the Imperial Parliament, 
 and subject only to the constitutional veto of the Crown." 
 
 As the debate went on it was evident that the Government 
 feared defeat if they resisted the amendment; but, at the same 
 time, the Irish members were extremely angry, and were 
 determined to resist it in the form it stood. Mr. Gladstone, 
 therefore, said that he was not in a position to resist the insertion 
 of the words, but that the Government would reserve to them- 
 selves a discretion later on as to the position they should take in 
 the Bill, and of giving them the entirely unexceptionable form 
 which he suggested at an earlier stage of the discussion. 
 
 Mr. Balfour pointed out that though the Government had 
 accepted the amendment they had qualified that acceptance
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 43 
 
 by a statement of their intention not to insert the words 
 here but to restrict the acceptance to words which, if left alone in 
 the Bill, would be worth absolutely nothing. 
 
 The amendment, which occupied 3! hours in discussion, was 
 then agreed to. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, MAY 17th EIGHTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 It was moved " That Clause II. as amended stand -part of 
 the Bill." 
 
 Mr. Henry Fowler (Wolverhampton), in defending the 
 clause, made a speech in which he declared that the restrictions 
 in the Bill were ample ; that they must trust the Irish Parliament ; 
 and that in case of injustice being done, the Imperial supremacy 
 could be brought into force. He said the machinery for up- 
 holding the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament was the 
 " veto." He made other remarks, which caused Mr. Goschen to 
 rise and demand that the Opposition might be allowed to reply 
 to his statements, which were held to be contrary to anything 
 which the Bill secured. It was understood that his reply was 
 to be permitted; but, after two short speeches had been made, 
 the closure was moved, and carried by a majority of sixty-one. 
 
 The motion, " That Clause II., as amended, stand part of the 
 Bill " was then put and carried. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 62 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 39 
 
 Mr. Goschen then moved to " report progress," in order to 
 complain that the Government had allowed no time to reply to 
 Mr. Fowler's arguments. He asked that a candid and straight- 
 forward course should be taken, and that a full and fair dis- 
 cussion should be allowed upon a matter of such vital importance 
 as this second clause. 
 
 The Ulster members appealed to the Government on the 
 ground of justice to the Irish minority. Not a single Ulster 
 member had been allowed to reply. 
 
 A scene of great confusion ensued, and the motion to report 
 progress was defeated by a majority of fi.fty-fi.ve. 
 
 Clause III. was as follows: 
 
 " The Irish Legislature shall not have 'power to make laws in 
 res-pect of the following matters, or any of them : (i) The 
 Crown, or the succession to the Crown, or a Regency; or the 
 Lord, Lieutenant as representative of the Crown; or (2) the mak- 
 ing of -peace or war or matters arising from a state of war; or 
 (3) Naval or military forces, or the defence of the realm; or 
 {4) Treaties and other relations with foreign states, or the rela- 
 tions between different -parts of Her Majesty's dominions, or 
 offences connected with such treaties or relations; or (5) Digni-
 
 44 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 ties or titles of honour; or (6) Treason, treason-felony, alienage, 
 or naturalisation; or (7) Trade with any -place out of Ireland; 
 or quarantine or navigation (exce-pt as respects inland waters 
 and local health or harbour regulations); or (8) Beacons, light- 
 houses, or sea works (exce-pt so far as they can consistently with 
 any general Act of Parliament be constructed or maintained by 
 a local harbour authority); or (9) Coinage : legal tender; or the 
 standard of weights and measures; or (10) Trade marks, mer- 
 chandise marks, co-pyright, or -patent rights. Any law made in 
 contravention of this section shall be void." 
 
 Capt. Naylor Leyland (Colchester) moved the postponement 
 of the clause, which contained the restrictions to be imposed on 
 the Irish Parliament. He contended that these restrictions should 
 be postponed until Parliament knew what the Irish Legislature 
 was to be, and whether Irish members were to be retained in the 
 Imperial Parliament, and in what numbers, and for what 
 purposes. 
 
 TUESDAY, MAY 30th NINTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 Capt. Naylor Leyland's amendment was further considered, 
 resisted by the Government, and defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted i hour 
 
 Government majority 33 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 10 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 17 
 
 Lord Wolmer (Edinburgh) moved an amendment with the 
 object of preventing the Irish Parliament from passing resolu- 
 tions, as well as laws, on the subjects with which they were for- 
 bidden to deal. 
 
 It was pointed out, as an instance, that although the Irish 
 Parliament were forbidden to deal with foreign questions, yet 
 they could pass resolutions touching foreign matters which would 
 counteract the restriction. In case of war they could pass resolu- 
 tions of sympathy with our enemies ; they could send envoys or 
 messengers to foreign courts, and be the means of causing us 
 great trouble; and they might make any foreign complications in 
 which we were engaged the occasion of extorting further con- 
 cessions. 
 
 The Government had no alternative but to admit the danger, 
 but they said there was no way of preventing it. The Solicitor- 
 General admitted that, as Franklin, in the time of the American 
 war, was sent to our enemies and accredited to them, there was 
 nothing to prevent Mr. Sexton or Mr. O'Brien, for instance, being 
 sent by the Irish Parliament to a country where we had any 
 difficulty, to intrigue with our enemies so as to make further 
 trouble and to prevent a friendly settlement.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 45 
 
 The Government were pressed hard to agree to the desired 
 safeguard, without which restrictions on powers of legislation 
 would be neutralised. 
 
 The Irish members opposed any concession, and Mr. Glad- 
 stone had to make significant admission that if the amendment 
 were accepted the Imperial Parliament would have no power to 
 enforce it. 
 
 This amendment was one of the most damaging that the 
 Government had to meet, but it was resisted and defeated by the 
 small majority of twenty-one. 
 
 The discussion lasted 5 hours 
 
 Government majority 21 
 
 Government minority after allowing for the 
 23 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 2 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 29 
 
 The announcement of the numbers was received with loud 
 and prolonged Unionist cheers, and the debate was adjourned at 
 eleven o'clock. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, MAY 31st TENTH DAY (THE " DERBY 
 DAY") IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 Lord Wolmer moved a further amendment with the object of 
 preventing the Irish Parliament voting money except on the recom- 
 mendation of the Crown acting under the advice of the Imperial 
 Parliament. 
 
 As the Bill stood the Irish Parliament could vote money for 
 almost any purpose. It could vote money for the purpose of 
 raising a body of volunteers that is to say, an armed force; it 
 could vote money to pay envoys or missions to foreign states; to 
 deal with the question of bounties, etc., all of which ought to 
 be outside the -power of an Irish Legislature. 
 
 It was contended by the Government that no money could 
 be paid except by order of the Viceroy acting for the Executive. 
 They had to admit that they could not avert the danger feared, 
 but they did not believe the danger would arise. They urged 
 the old argument that the Irish Parliament must be trusted not 
 to do wrong. It was pointed out, however, that the Executive, 
 under which the Lord Lieutenant would act, was an Irish Execu- 
 tive; that the Paymaster-General of the Irish Parliament was 
 appointed by the Irish Executive, and would, therefore, have no 
 option but to obey the will of that Executive in these matters. 
 Such powers, it was argued, were dangerous, and ought not to 
 be given. The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2j hours 
 
 Government majority 52 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented 2g
 
 46 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 THURSDAY, JUNE 1st ELEVENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 An amendment was proposed by Mr. Byrne (Essex), in order 
 to prevent " armed associations in Ireland, and the carrying and 
 using of arms for drill and practice in arms." 
 
 This was to prevent raising an army under another name. 
 Mr. Byrne was proceeding with his statement at 12 o'clock, mid- 
 night, when the debate stood adjourned. 
 
 FRIDAY, JUNE 2nd TWELFTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 The discussion on Mr. Byrne's amendment was resumed. 
 The debate was marked by strong language on the part of the 
 Irish Nationalists, who threatened the Ministry with their dis- 
 pleasure if any further concessions were made. Mr. Sexton told 
 the Chairman that he had risen twice on the previous day, when 
 concessions were made, in order to protest against them. The 
 Chairman of Committee actually apologised for not seeing him 
 and calling on him to speak. This incident showed the arrogant 
 assumption of Irish members, whose demand was that they 
 should always be allowed to speak when they rose in their places; 
 while scores of British members rose in the same manner and had 
 no opportunity to speak. 
 
 The Ulster members urged that unless this amendment was 
 accepted there would be no protection for them; that the Irish 
 Parliament could pass a Disarmament Bill, by which Ulster 
 could be disarmed, while the Irish Nationalist Parliament could 
 have forces under their control to deal with disarmed Ulster. 
 They characterised it as an infamous proposal, too glaring not 
 to be seen. They contended that all questions of arming bodies 
 outside the local police should be questions for the Imperial 
 Parliament to settle. Mr. T. W. Russell declared that it was 
 now plain that the coercion of Ulster was meant, and that as the 
 British army could not be depended on to act against the loyal 
 population, there was to be an armed force under the Irish Execu- 
 tive to do the work. 
 
 The Irish Nationalists, however, strongly opposed the 
 amendment declared they would not have it and the Govern- 
 ment, consequently, could not give way. After a heated dis- 
 cussion, the amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 38 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 15 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 13
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 47 
 
 Amendments by Colonel Lockwood (Essex), and Mr. 
 Brodrick (Guildford, Surrey), with the object of safeguarding 
 the civil liberties of Her Majesty's soldiers stationed in Ireland, 
 and to prevent the manufacture of arms and munitions of war by 
 the Irish Parliament, were defeated by the Government. 
 
 It being now ten minutes to seven p.m. the debate was 
 adjourned. 
 
 MONDAY, JUNE 5th THIRTEENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 Mr. Tomlinson (Preston) moved an amendment in order to 
 secure the rights of Englishmen and Scotchmen living in Ireland, 
 and to -prevent the Irish Parliament from drawing any distinction 
 between different subjects of the Queen with regard to the holding 
 of property or office in Ireland. 
 
 Mr. Courtney (Bodmin, Cornwall) urged that the danger 
 should be guarded against. He mentioned a case in New Zealand, 
 the Legislature of which made a difference in matters of taxation 
 between persons domiciled in that country and aliens. Ireland 
 should be prevented from thus legislating to the detriment of 
 the English, Scotch, or any other subjects of the Queen. 
 
 Mr. Morley moved the closure, which was carried. 
 
 Mr. Tomlinson's amendment was then put, and rejected. 
 
 The discussion lasted ,. i hour 
 
 Government majority 37 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 14 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 19 
 
 Mr. Yerburgh (Chester) moved an amendment, the object of 
 which was to exclude offences committed on the high seas from 
 the control of the Irish Parliament. It was contended that this 
 was not a domestic Irish question, and that all cases of piracy 
 and outrage at sea should be matters for Imperial treatment. Mr. 
 Yerburgh urged that under the Bill the Irish Parliament could 
 pass any law it pleased with reference to offences on the high 
 seas ; and that that Parliament ought to have no power to alter the 
 Imperial law respecting such offences. Outrages, for instance, 
 might be committed on Scotch and English fishermen off the 
 coast of Ireland, and, it was asked, what chance of redress would 
 these fishermen have if their grievances were referred to an Irish 
 Parliament? Many other instances in point were advanced. 
 
 The Government, however, resisted the amendment, and it 
 was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i hour 
 
 Government majority 63 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 40 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 6
 
 48 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Mr. Gerald Balfour (Leeds) moved an amendment to the 
 effect that the appointment of judges or magistrates should be in 
 the hands of the Crown, acting under the advice of an Executive 
 Government. The question whether the appointment should be 
 on the advice of the Imperial Executive Government or upon 
 that of the Irish Executive Government a most important 
 matter was not raised by this amendment, which only sought 
 to prevent judges and magistrates being appointed by the Irish 
 Parliament a mode of election which would make those judges 
 and magistrates subject to the popular vote, and which would 
 thus take away their independence. Reference was made to cases 
 in certain States of America where this mode of election pre- 
 vailed, and where the administration of justice was, in conse- 
 quence, frequently reduced to a farce. 
 
 The Government had the usual reply, that there was no real 
 danger. Mr. Bryce (Gladstonian) had to admit that the most 
 unfortunate results in the United States attended this method 
 of election. Instances were given wherein Irish judges were 
 attacked continually by Irish Nationalists; and it was declared 
 that the independence of the judges could not be secured if they 
 were placed under the control of the Irish Parliament. It was 
 pointed out that in a country like Ireland, where there were two 
 races, two religions, and bitter controversies, the Imperial pro- 
 tection as regards the administration of justice was necessary for 
 the safeguarding of the minorities. As the Bill stood, these 
 minorities after six years would be at the mercy of judges and 
 magistrates who might be appointed by the Irish Parliament, and 
 who, therefore, would be likely to be political partisans. 
 
 The Irish Nationalist members, however, strongly opposed 
 the amendment; the Government, as a consequence, could not give 
 way, and it was therefore defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2j hours 
 
 Government majority 36 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 13 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 16 
 
 TUESDAY, JUNE 6th FOURTEENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 An amendment was moved by Mr. Butcher (York) to with- 
 draw from the Irish Parliament the power of making laws dealing 
 with " criminal conspiracy and combination." As the Bill stood, 
 the Irish Parliament could deal with the law of conspiracy, and 
 could legalise the plan of campaign, the National League, or 
 boycotting with all its terrors and persecutions. Thus minorities, 
 and all those who were obnoxious in the eyes of the Nationalist 
 Party, would be placed in a very dangerous position. 
 
 The only reply the Government could make was the usual 
 one that the Irish Parliament must be trusted] that it was in- 
 sulting to the Nationalists to suppose they could do wrong, and
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 49 
 
 that these same Nationalists whatever they had been in the past 
 were now moderate and reasonable. 
 
 Mr. Morley moved the closure, and the amendment was 
 rejected. 
 
 The discussion lasted 15 hours 
 
 Government majority 41 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 18 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 13 
 
 Mr. Barton (Mid. Armagh), on behalf of Mr. Carson 
 (Dublin University), moved an amendment to -prevent the Irish 
 Parliament from deciding on the " -procedure in criminal matters" 
 
 Sir Henry James pointed out clearly that it was idle to 
 retain treason and treason-felony, and such matters in the hands 
 of the Imperial Parliament if the -procedure were left to Irish 
 courts and to Irish-appointed judges. He urged that a man 
 might be condemned for treason or for any other crime, under 
 the Imperial law, but that the procedure might be so arranged by 
 the Irish Parliament that when a man was committed for trial he 
 might be allowed bail, or permitted to escape, or, if convicted 
 of outrage or murder and condemned, he might be allowed to 
 come and go and make his esca-pe. It was evident, he asserted, 
 that " the Irish Legislature at their will might make the ad- 
 ministration of justice not only a fiction but a farce." Criminal 
 procedure, therefore, should be vested in the Imperial Parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 The Solicitor-General made a very weak reply, dealing only 
 with side issues. 
 
 The debate showed that in this respect, as in others, the safe- 
 guards for the rights and liberties of minorities were mere -pa-per 
 ones. The Government, throughout the day's discussion, were 
 taunted with their helpless position. It was urged that they 
 had received their orders from their Irish masters, and that they 
 were obliged to obey, making, however, such excuses as they 
 were able. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2f hours 
 
 Government majority 40 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 17 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 13 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JUNE 7th FIFTEENTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 Mr. Grant Lawson (Thirsk, Yorks.) proposed as an amend- 
 ment, " That the oath of allegiance should not be abolished" 
 
 Many members declared themselves not in favour of any 
 oath of allegiance, as they considered that it was not binding, in
 
 50 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 many cases, on those who took it; but, at the same time, it was 
 contended that if the oath of allegiance was to be abolished, it 
 should be abolished by a general law affecting the United King- 
 dom. In the face of the strong Irish opposition, however, the 
 Government could not accept the amendment, which was rejected. 
 
 The discussion lasted I hour 
 
 Government majority 46 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 23 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 5 
 
 THURSDAY, JUNE 8th SIXTEENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 Mr. Bartley (North Islington) moved an amendment to -pre- 
 vent the Irish Parliament from giving bounties to Irish industries. 
 
 This raised a question closely affecting British manufacturers 
 and British working men, and the Unionist members of Great 
 Britain demanded that the power of giving bounties should not 
 be placed in the hands of an Irish Parliament. The Home Rule 
 Bill of 1886 did not allow the giving of bounties, but in the 
 present Bill it appeared that the Irish Nationalists had secured 
 what they wanted. 
 
 It was contended that there was no difference between the 
 " bounty " system and actual Protection. The Irish Legislature 
 were, by the Bill, forbidden to im-pose duties on British manu- 
 factured goods, but the prohibition would be useless if the Legis- 
 lature obtained the power of giving bounties to Irish productions. 
 As an instance, they were forbidden to impose a tax, say, of 6d. 
 a pair on British shoes imported into Ireland, but they might 
 give bounties to the Irish shoe manufacturers of 6d. per pair, 
 which would force British shoes out of the market, and be just 
 the same as a -protective duty. 
 
 The same process would apply to the manufacture of cotton 
 and woollen goods. Bounties might also be given to the pro- 
 ducers of Irish butter and cheese, to the great injury of the Eng- 
 lish farmer. 
 
 The Government were challenged to defend their position. 
 Mr. Gladstone said that the Bill gave power to give " premiums," 
 and not "bounties;" and that premiums were given to the con- 
 gested districts of Ireland in support of fisheries, and to make 
 light railways. 
 
 It was pointed out, however, that these so-called -premiums 
 were simply for charitable purposes, and for the benefit of certain 
 poor districts; but that it was absolutely unjust to give an Irish 
 Parliament power to tax Ulster and the people of Ireland 
 generally in order (by bounties) to subsidise manufacturers in, 
 say, the south of Ireland. The British working classes were to 
 be called upon, not only to provide money to set up an Irish
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 51 
 
 Parliament, but to allow that Parliament to have the power, by 
 the giving of bounties to Irish traders, of creating a spurious and 
 intolerable competition with British manufacturers. It was 
 asserted that the British working men were thus asked " to pay 
 for the rope to hang themselves." 
 
 Mr. Wolff (Belfast) remarked that great industries had been 
 created in Ulster without bounties; and that the Ulster people 
 had no facilities or laws different from those in other parts 
 of Ireland. Why, he asked, had not industries been created in 
 other parts of Ireland ? He said it was on account of the 
 difference of race that there were industry and enterprise exist- 
 ing among the English and Scotch race in the north of Ireland 
 which were wanting in the Celtic population of other parts. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain quoted from Mr. Morley's own article in 
 the Nineteenth Century, in which he (Mr. Morley) said : 
 
 " There could be little doubt that, given the chance, Ireland 
 would imitate the example of the United States, Canada, Vic- 
 toria, and most other countries in the world, by erecting a pro- 
 tective tariff against woollen cloth, shoes, and other manufac- 
 tured articles." 
 
 Mr. Balfour challenged Mr. Gladstone to deny that these 
 subventions to Irish manufactures would compete unfairly with 
 British trade. No answer was given. The Irish members, how- 
 ever, insisted that these detrimental provisions should remain in 
 the Bill. 
 
 The discussion was a very damaging one to the Government, 
 as many of the Gladstonian members were heartily opposed to the 
 proposal under discussion, and in sympathy with the amendment. 
 It was, the Government felt, necessary to -prevent further debate < 
 and Mr. Morley accordingly moved the closure, which was carried 
 amidst signs of strong dissatisfaction at the burking of this im- 
 portant question after only about two hours' discussion. 
 
 Government majority on the Closure was ... 32 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented Q 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 24 
 
 Mr. Bartley's amendment was then put and defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 36 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented '. 13 
 
 British majority against the Govonment .. 18 
 
 Sir Thomas Lea (Londonderry) moved an amendment to 
 reserve the Imperial control over the Irish harbours, so as to pre- 
 vent the Irish Legislature from increasing the harbour dties, and 
 placing other restrictions on such ports as Belfast, and giving 
 preference to harbours in the south. 
 
 He said that this provision was in the Home Rule Bill of 
 1886, and ought not to be omitted from the present Bill.
 
 52 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 The Government opposed the amendment, which was 
 defeated. 
 
 Government majority 45 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 22 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 10 
 
 Mr. Whiteley (Stockport) proposed an amendment to -prevent 
 the Irish Legislature from re-pealing laws now existing for the 
 protection of men, women, and children working in factories, 
 workshops, and mines. 
 
 He contended that legislation for factories, workshops, and 
 mines should be in the hands of the Imperial Parliament, and 
 that it should be alike for the whole of the United Kingdom. 
 
 FRIDAY, JUNE 9th SEVENTEENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.} 
 
 Mr. Whiteley's amendment was further considered. 
 
 The unreasonableness was pointed out of allowing members 
 of the Irish Parliament to settle this national question as it 
 affected Ireland, and of allowing them at the same time to inter- 
 fere with or settle the same question as it affected Great Britain. 
 The working hours of the British workman might be fixed by 
 legislation, say, at an eight-hours' day, while in Ireland the 
 working day might be fixed at ten hours, or any other number. 
 The British manufacturer was subject to strict factory laws as 
 regards health and the employment of children ; while in Ireland, 
 if the amendment was rejected, any cheap and insufficient 
 arrangement might be allowed. No such restrictions as were in 
 force in Great Britain might be imposed in Ireland restrictions 
 affecting the health and comfort of the workpeople, or on child 
 labour. The British manufacturers would thus be handicapped. 
 
 Mr. Mundella said the woollen trade was going to Ireland 
 on account of lower wages there. But, it was urged, if the work- 
 men in Ireland were allowed to work longer hours, and were sub- 
 ject to no restrictions, and if children were allowed to work at 
 all ages and at all hours, it would be impossible for the British 
 manufacturer to corn-pete on fair terms with the Irish manu- 
 facturer. This was not only an economic, but a social question, 
 affecting the health of the people. 
 
 It was shown that the Irish skilled artisans in the north of 
 Ireland were few in comparison with the rural voters, and that it 
 was only through their union with the artisan population of 
 Great Britain that good factory legislation could be obtained. 
 When that union was destroyed the Irish artisan would have to 
 submit to anything which the Irish Parliament might inflict upon 
 him. Finally, it was urged that we had now a splendid code of 
 factory laws in existence, applicable to the whole of the United 
 Kingdom, and that all legislation affecting such code should be 
 in the hands of the Imperial Parliament.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 53 
 
 The Government, however, opposed the amendment, and it 
 was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 30 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 7 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 23 
 
 MONDAY, JUNE 12th EIGHTEENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 Sir John Lubbock moved an amendment to prevent the Irish 
 Parliament from legislating with respect to " banks or bills of 
 exchange." This was a matter which would affect the commerce 
 of the United Kingdom. It was pointed out that wherever 
 Federal Governments were established the power of altering the 
 law affecting banks or bills of exchange was retained by the 
 central Parliament. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone was reminded that a few days previously, in 
 reply to an amendment of Mr. Courtney, he said: 
 
 " He based his position on this, that it was vital to the com- 
 merce of the three kingdoms that there should be uniformity of 
 commercial law from one extremity of the kingdom to the other." 
 
 The Government were asked to give practical effect to this 
 statement by accepting the amendment; and they were further 
 asked to give a fair answer as to whether Irish bills of exchange 
 would be treated as foreign bills or not. 
 
 The Irish Nationalist members strongly opposed the amend- 
 ment, and positively threatened the Government with grave conse- 
 quences if they attempted to give way on this point. 
 
 The amendment was therefore defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted , if hours 
 
 Government majority 29 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 23 
 
 Sir F. Powell (Wigan) proposed an amendment to prevent 
 the Irish Parliament dealing with the subject of marriage and 
 divorce. 
 
 It was urged that the Protestant minority in Ireland valued 
 very much their marriage laws ; that they feared, under a Parlia- 
 ment elected by Roman Catholic influence, those laws would be 
 interfered with; that civil marriages would be abolished; and that 
 mixed marriages between Protestants and Catholics, which were 
 common in Ulster, and to which the Roman Catholic authorities 
 were desperately opposed, would be forbidden. By having two 
 sets of marriage laws one for Great Britain and another for 
 Ireland great inconvenience might arise. For instance, a 
 woman might be legally married in Great Britain, but not married
 
 54 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 in Ireland. Children might be legitimate in Great Britain, but 
 illegitimate in Ireland. A man having property in both countries 
 would perhaps find his children disinherited as being illegitimate 
 in the one country. 
 
 The Prime Minister opposed the amendment, and used the 
 strange argument that in the States of America the marriage laws 
 were very diversified; that divorce was so easy in some States, 
 and the law so mixed, that a man might be legally married in 
 some States and not in others. 
 
 The Unionists replied that such argument went to show the 
 absolute necessity of having the law of marriage and the law of 
 divorce placed on the same footing in Ireland as in England, and 
 that it would be most unjust to the Protestant minority to leave 
 such important questions as those of marriage and divorce to be 
 settled by the Roman Catholic priesthood. 
 
 The Irish Party, however, opposed the amendment, and it 
 was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted if hours 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 16 
 
 TUESDAY, JUNE 13th NINETEENTH DAY IN COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause III. Continued.) 
 
 On the motion, " That Clause HI. stand part of the Bill" 
 the motion was passed without a division, and Clause III. as 
 amended was added to the Bill. 
 
 Clause IV. was as follows: 
 
 " The powers of the Irish Legislature shall not extend, to the 
 making of any law: (i) Respecting the establishment or endow- 
 ment of religion, or -prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or 
 (2) Imposing any disability or conferring any -privilege on ac- 
 count of religious belief; or (3) Abrogating or -prejudicially 
 affecting the right to establish or maintain any -place of denomi- 
 national education or any denominational institution or charity; 
 or, (4) Prejudicially affecting the right of any child to attend a 
 school receiving -public money, without attending the religious 
 instruction at that school; or, (5) Whereby any person may be 
 deprived of life, liberty, or -property without due process of law, 
 or may be denied the equal protection of the laws, or whereby 
 private property may be taken without just compensation; or, 
 
 (6) Whereby any existing corporation incorporated by Royal 
 Charter or by any local or general Act of Parliament (not being 
 a corporation raising for public -pur-poses taxes, rates, cess, dues, 
 or tolls, or administering funds so raised] may, unless it con- 
 sents or the leave of Her Majesty is first obtained on address 
 from the two Houses of the Irish Legislature, be deprived of its 
 rights, -privileges or property without due -process of law; or 
 
 (7) Whereby any inhabitant of the United Kingdom may be 
 deprived of equal rights as respects public sea fisheries. Any 
 law made in contravention of this section shall be void."
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 55 
 
 This clause professes to place certain subjects outside the 
 power of the Irish Legislature to deal with. 
 
 Mr. H. S. Foster moved an amendment to prevent the Irish 
 Legislature from voting or granting public money, by resolution, 
 for matters on which they are forbidden to legislate. 
 
 The amendment was resisted by the Government, and 
 defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 20 minutes 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 15 
 
 Sir Henry James (Bury) moved the following amendment : 
 
 " Respecting the disposition of pro-perty for charitable, pious, 
 or religions uses." 
 
 The object of the amendment was to prevent ecclesiastics 
 obtaining property left by persons who were on their death-beds; 
 and to prevent land being left for religious corporations. As 
 the Imperial law stood it secured these objects, and the amend- 
 ment sought to prevent the Irish Parliament from altering the 
 law. 
 
 It was pointed out that the existing wholesome legislation 
 (i.e., the Mortmain laws) on this subject had been obtained after 
 ages of struggle against ecclesiastical influence; that if this legis- 
 lation was necessary in Great Britain, it was far more necessary 
 in Ireland, where the priests had such power over the people; and 
 that unless such legislation was maintained, throughout the whole 
 kingdom, all the evils of olden times would be revived. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone could only answer that the Irish Legislature 
 would not do anything contrary to present custom ! 
 
 It was pointed out, however, as above remarked, that 
 ecclesiastics had, in by-gone times, when they had the power, 
 habitually obtained death-bed legacies; and, moreover, that in 
 Canada, at the present time, enormous tracts of land were owned 
 by the Roman Catholic Church lands which were made free 
 from all taxation. No reply, however, could be obtained from 
 the Gladstonians on this point, and the amendment was therefore 
 defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted ii hours 
 
 Government majority 44 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 21 
 
 British majority against the Government ... u 
 
 Mr. Boscawen (Tunbridge, Kent) moved an amendment to 
 prevent the Irish Parliament from imposing disabilities, or con- 
 ferring privileges on account of political opinions, as well as 
 religious opinions. 
 
 It was urged that, after the threats which the Nationalists 
 had uttered as to what they would do to political opponents 
 when they came into power, it was very important that this pro-
 
 56 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 tection should be afforded the latter. During the discussion 
 cases were instanced in which the minority, on account of their 
 political opinions, would undoubtedly need protection, both for 
 life and for property. 
 
 The Government resisted the amendment, which was 
 defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 36 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 13 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 16 
 
 Dr. Rentoul (East Down) moved an amendment to prevent 
 the Irish Legislature from altering the law which the Presby- 
 terians at present enjoyed regulating marriage in the Presby- 
 terian Church in Ireland. 
 
 As a Presbyterian he (Dr. Rentoul) said he must demand this 
 protection. 
 
 The Solicitor-General, in reply, made light of the amend- 
 ment, and intimated that the danger was an imaginary one. Mr. 
 Gladstone said the apprehensions of the Presbyterians were 
 groundless. He ridiculed their fears, and declared that the Irish 
 Parliament would not commit any such injustice as that which 
 Dr. Rentoul feared. 
 
 Mr. Balfour replied that it was all very well to represent the 
 Irish Parliament as an angelic assembly ; but that when he looked 
 back and saw the discreditable conduct and actions which the 
 Nationalist Party had been guilty of, the trust now sought to be 
 reposed in them was not warranted. He challenged Irish 
 members to contradict the statement that, with regard to the 
 Roman Catholic Church, a marriage in a Presbyterian Church 
 was no marriage at all. Where was the harm of securing to the 
 Presbyterian minority the privileges in question ? 
 
 Mr. Macartney (South Antrim) quoted from Mr. Henry 
 Fowler's speech, delivered at Newcastle at the last general elec- 
 tion (when the votes of Nonconformists were wanted], in which 
 he (Mr. Fowler) assured the meeting that "the Nonconformists 
 of Ireland should have every possible safeguard." Mr. 
 Macartney added, " We now see what these promises are worth." 
 
 There were loud cries for Mr. Fowler to justify his position, 
 but no response was made, and the Irish members proceeded to 
 shout down any further arguments from the Unionists. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted f hour 
 
 Government majority 38 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 15 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 16
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 57 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JUNE 14th TWENTIETH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IV. Continued.} 
 
 Mr. Gerald Balfour moved an amendment to prevent the 
 Irish Parliament from making any law which should determine 
 the qualifications, etc., of judges and judicial officers. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 19 
 
 Mr. Gerald Balfour proposed another amendment, to restrain 
 the Irish Parliament from making laws for the purpose of 
 diminishing the salaries or interfering with the pensions of any 
 officers of the Crown so long as they held their offices. The 
 object was to prevent members of the Irish Government from 
 exercising undue influence on judicial bodies, and also to prevent 
 the Irish Government from having the power to reduce a judge's 
 salary or pension in case he gave an unpopular verdict. It was 
 urged that, considering the violence and threats with which 
 Irish Nationalists had treated judges who, in doing their duty, 
 had been obnoxious to them, the present law should be retained 
 in order to secure the independence of the Bench. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted f hour 
 
 Government majority 42 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented IQ 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 13 
 
 THURSDAY, JUNE 15th TWENTY-FIRST DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IV. Continued.'} 
 
 Mr. Mowbray (Prestwich, Lancashire) moved an amendment 
 to prevent the Irish Legislature from passing any law " whereby 
 the -privileges or immunities of any of Her Majesty's subjects 
 might be abridged" 
 
 It was pointed out that as the United Kingdom had no 
 written Constitution, the Common Law was relied on for the 
 protection of citizens; but the Bill, as it stood, enabled the Irish 
 Parliament to override the Common Law, and to take no notice 
 of it. The amendment only asked that the rights which Eng- 
 lish and Scotch citizens had under the Common Law should 
 be secured also to all classes of the Irish people. It was shown 
 that the American Constitution provided this safeguard, by pro- 
 viding that " a citizen of one State shall have the same privileges 
 and immunities as natives of other States, when going there."
 
 58 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 The Government had to admit that even the right of trial 
 by jury, which was one of the chief rights of the citizens of 
 the United Kingdom, might be done away with by the Irish 
 Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Matthews (Birmingham) showed that under the Bill the 
 Irish Parliament would not only have this power, but would 
 also have the power to abolish the right of habeas corpus, and to 
 repeal other Acts of the Imperial Parliament. The amendment 
 was necessary if the loyal minority were to be protected at all. 
 
 The amendment was, however, resisted and defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 41 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 18 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 15 
 
 Mr. Wyndham (Dover) moved the next amendment. As 
 the Bill stood, the loyal minority were not to be deprived of 
 their rights and liberties except according to " due process of 
 law." 
 
 It was contended that this was a vague term, and might 
 mean according to any law which the Irish Parliament might 
 pass, and not the Imperial law. In order to make it clear, the 
 amendment proposed to give a definite meaning to the words, 
 by declaring that " due process of law " should give not less 
 security than is given by the Common Law of the United King- 
 dom. It was urged that this would test the sincerity of those 
 who, on public platforms, advocated the protection and the safe- 
 guarding of minorities. 
 
 Sir Charles Russell and the Solicitor-General, on behalf of 
 the Government, had to admit that the term " due process of 
 law " could not be defined, and Mr. Bryce, amid much laughter, 
 not only said that it could not, but that it ought not to be defined. 
 It was shown, however, that on the reading of the phrase the 
 safety of the lives and liberties of the minority in Ireland abso- 
 lutely de-pended. As the Bill stood, any class of the loyal 
 minority might have their civil and religious rights their lives 
 and property placed at the mercy of an Irish-made law, and 
 thus the protection which every citizen now enjoyed under the 
 Common Law of the land might be abolished. 
 
 Mr. Dunbar Barton (Mid. Armagh) earnestly pleaded for 
 the acceptance of the amendment. He showed that the Bill of 
 Rights, freedom of the press, habeas cor-pus, trial by jury, free- 
 dom from arrest, right of appeal, and all those great constitu- 
 tional rights and safeguards which the people had now secured 
 to them under the Common Law, after centuries of struggle 
 rights which made the British citizen the freest subject in the 
 world might be abolished in Ireland by an Irish Parliament. 
 Such powers, he contended, ought only to be held by the Im- 
 perial Parliament.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 59 
 
 It was contended that the phrase, " due process of law," 
 was introduced only as a sop to allay the fears of the British 
 people. These words meant nothing unless defined as the amend- 
 ment proposed. What chance, it was asked, would a loyalist, 
 tried by a Clare jury under a law made by a Nationalist Parlia- 
 ment of Dublin, have if he were deprived of the protection of 
 the Imperial law of the United Kingdom, which the humblest 
 citizens in all parts of the country now possess? 
 
 Mr. Dunbar Barton declared as follows: 
 
 " As an Ulster man, I say that as a protection of life, liberty, 
 and property the Bill is absolutely worthless. I repudiate the 
 paper safeguard. If this is all you have to offer in exchange 
 for the liberties of Ulster men, we shall be warranted in any 
 course we might take to defend our own lives and liberties, 
 and whatever course we may take would be approved by every 
 lover of freedom in the civilised world." 
 
 The Government remained silent, but Mr. Balfour declared 
 that the question was so important that they (the Government) 
 could not be allowed to ride off under the cloak of silence. 
 
 Sir Charles Russell made a reply, but Sir Henry James said 
 that no real answer at all had been given. The Government had 
 evaded every point. Those who had framed the clause (he 
 urged) stood convicted of having put in words of no force or 
 meaning. He appealed to Gladstonians who said they would 
 agree to no Home Rule that did not give securities to minorities. 
 " Dp not take my evidence," he said, " but the evidence of the 
 Solicitor-General and the Attorney-General, in order to see that 
 the words are absolutely worthless as safeguards." 
 
 The Irish members were in full force, and determined to have 
 their way. The Government, therefore, while unable to answer 
 the arguments, were obliged to resist this important amendment, 
 which, it was shown beyond dispute, was absolutely necessary 
 to -protect the loyal minority in Ireland. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2! hours 
 
 Government majority 32 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 9 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 21 
 
 FRIDAY, JUNE 16th TWENTY-SECOND DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IV. Continued.'] 
 
 Mr. Gerald Balfour (Leeds) moved an amendment to the 
 effect that the words " due process of law " should be " in accord- 
 ance with the settled -principles and -precedents of judicial -pro- 
 cedure, and unalterable save by action of the Imperial Parlia- 
 ment." 
 
 This was a further attempt to get some intelligible meaning 
 of the words " due process of law."
 
 60 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 The Government at last consented to accept the amendment 
 in a modified form. 
 
 The Nationalist Irish members were furious at this conces- 
 sion, and attacked the Government for making it. 
 
 The Attorney-General, on the part of the Government, seeing 
 the opposition which was raised by the Irish members, denied 
 that the Government were making any concession, and said that 
 they had accepted the words to please the Unionist Opposition, 
 but that they did not consider them to be of much importance. 
 
 The Irish Nationalist members carried their opposition to a 
 division against this so-called concession, but the Government, 
 with the aid of the Opposition, were enabled to beat them 
 by a majority of 180. 
 
 MONDAY, JUNE 19th TWENTY-THIRD DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IV. Continued.} 
 
 Mr. H. Hobhouse (East Somerset) moved an amendment to 
 the effect that the just compensation named in the Bill should be 
 such as is defined by the law as it at present stands. 
 
 It was pointed out that as the clause stood " just compensa- 
 tion " is not defined, and would give rise to unlimited litigation. 
 The men who issued the " No Rent " manifesto, and those who 
 declared that the land was only worth prairie value, should not 
 be permitted to define the meaning of "just compensation." 
 
 The Attorney-General said that an appeal might be made 
 to the Exchequer Judges. It was pointed out that this would 
 mean litigation in any case, but that the Exchequer Judges under 
 the Bill were allowed only to interfere when the Irish Parliament 
 dealt with matter outside its -province; that they, the judges, had 
 nothing to do with deciding whether legislation on matters over 
 which the Irish Parliament had power was just or unjust, and 
 that therefore the Irish Parliament could do what it liked in this 
 matter. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i hour 
 
 Government majority 32 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented Q 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 16 
 
 Mr. Carson (Dublin University) moved an amendment to 
 the effect that -proceedings by petition of right should not be 
 altered or abridged by the Irish Parliament. 
 
 This amendment was a most important one. To understand 
 it, it is necessary to explain that at present no subject or com- 
 pany can take proceedings against the Government, no matter 
 how much they may have been injured, except they first make a 
 petition called the " petition of right " to be allowed to do so. 
 This is always granted; but, without it, no person, however much 
 aggrieved, has any legal right to take proceedings, and would, 
 therefore, be at the mercy of the Irish Government.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 61 
 
 The Solicitor-General could not deny this, but fell back on 
 the old statement as to value and power of the veto. 
 
 Mr. Carson declared that this was mere quibbling, not states- 
 manship, and that it was another example of the injustice which 
 might be done to individuals and minorities under the Bill. 
 
 Mr. Shaw (Gladstonian member for the Border Burghs) said 
 that these petitions of right were not necessary in Scotland, where 
 individuals had the right of proceeding against the Government, 
 and where the Crown was treated as an ordinary defendant. 
 
 The Unionists, in reply, said that they would be satisfied 
 with the Scotch method, or by the " petition of right " as it 
 existed in England. They only wanted, they urged, some safe- 
 guard against wrong being done, and which was likely to be 
 done if safeguards did not exist. 
 
 The Government resisted the amendment, and it was 
 defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i hour 
 
 Government majority 37 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 14 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 14 
 
 Dr. Rentoul (East Down) moved an amendment to the effect 
 that the Irish Parliament should not have the -power to abolish 
 the right of " habeas corpus." 
 
 The " habeas corpus" as it is called, is one of the most sacred 
 rights belonging to every citizen in the land. It means that no 
 man shall be imprisoned without being brought to trial at the 
 earliest possible moment. It is considered the safeguard of all 
 personal liberty. Without it men might be imprisoned and kept 
 lingering in prison for any length of time. Under " habeas 
 cor-pus " every man charged with an offence has the security that 
 he shall, as suggested, be brought up for trial without delay, and 
 have it decided whether he is guilty or not guilty. 
 
 Sir Henry James contended that this elementary right should 
 only be taken away by the Imperial Parliament. He said we 
 have to do with the fears of the Ulster men ; to protect the 
 minority; and to provide that men shall not be imprisoned with- 
 out trial. As the Bill stood, the Irish Parliament would have 
 full power over the liberties of the subject. 
 
 It was shown that the constitution of the United States 
 prevents a State from suspending habeas cor-pus unless for rebel- 
 lion or invasion. The powers which the United States Govern- 
 ment did not give to the several States Legislatures were -proposed 
 to be given to Ireland. 
 
 The Government replied that the Irish would not use their 
 power ; to which it was reiterated, " Then why give it ? Why not 
 accept the amendment ?" 
 
 The Attorney-General could only say that the fears ex- 
 pressed were groundless, and he taunted Ulster with having
 
 2 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 needless fears. He said there was no likelihood that the Catholic 
 majority would oppress the Protestant minority. 
 
 A stormy discussion followed. It was pointed out that the 
 Gladstonian candidates had -pledged themselves at the election 
 to protect the minorities in Ireland, whereas now the Government 
 simply say, " What have we to do with Ulster's fears ?" and the 
 Irish Government is to be allowed to mark down any opponents 
 and imprison them without trial. 
 
 Other Unionists complained that the Government refused to 
 listen to or answer seriously any arguments on this all-important 
 matter. 
 
 The Irish, however, refused all concessions, and the Govern- 
 ment had to oppose the amendment, which, accordingly, was 
 defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2$ hours 
 
 Government majority 29 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 20 
 
 TUESDAY, JUNE 20th TWENTY-FOURTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IV. Continued.'} 
 
 Lord Wolmer (Edinburgh) moved an amendment to -prevent 
 the Irish Parliament from passing any legislation of an " ex post 
 facto " character. The meaning of this was that the Irish Legis- 
 lature should not make laws of a retrospective character, or that 
 should affect proceedings which had happened in the past. As 
 an example : Mr. Dillon had said that when they came into power 
 they would mete out punishment to civil servants and others 
 police and others who had been opposed to them. To do this 
 the Irish Parliament would have to pass what is called an ex 
 post facto law in order to be able to punish these men for what 
 they did years before. Another example was, that if the Irish 
 Parliament wished to reinstate tenants who had been turned out 
 of their farms for declining to pay a fair rent, which farms might 
 have since been let or sold to others, an ex post facto law might 
 be passed extending back to years, which would have the effect 
 of depriving the present holders of their farms in order to 
 reinstate the tenants who had been turned out. 
 
 The Government said it was monstrous to put such a check 
 on the Irish Parliament; but it was again asked why, if the 
 American Constitution placed this check on their several States, 
 a similar check should not be put on the Irish Parliament. 
 
 It was also pointed out that those who had taken derelict 
 and evicted farms had been treated as lepers; had been punished 
 and outraged by the Land League; and that the Irish National- 
 ists, when they had the additional power of an Irish Parliament,
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 63 
 
 would be likely to give full effect to their known opinions. The 
 minority had reason to dread this vindictive legislation. It was 
 urged that the Nationalists had never recalled their threats, and 
 Mr. Chamberlain challenged Mr. Dillon to say if he had done 
 so. Mr. Dillon replied that he would take no notice of the 
 challenge unless the date and full particulars of the speech 
 to which Mr. Chamberlain referred were given. Mr. Chamber- 
 lain immediately gave him the place and date, viz., Kilmovin, 
 December 5th, 1886. 
 
 Mr. Balfour said he could hardly believe anyone with his 
 eyes open could give such power to the Irish Legislature. It 
 was insane thus further to hand over the loyal minority to such 
 dangers. He contended that if any retrospective legislation were 
 ever necessary it should be done by the Imperial Parliament. 
 Any persecution any oppression was possible under this clause, 
 and everything in the nature of a safeguard for the loyalist per- 
 sons and minorities was utterly denied by the Government. 
 
 The amendment, however, was opposed and defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i hours 
 
 Government majority 30 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 7 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 21 
 
 Lord Wolmer moved an amendment to -prevent the Irish 
 Parliament legislating to impair the obligation of contracts; 
 that is to say, that where contracts are made between parties 
 the Irish Parliament should not upset them. It was pointed out 
 again that this safeguard was in the American Constitution (which 
 refused the power to the several States to impair contracts), and 
 that, dealing as it does with all the fortunes of citizens, it should 
 be retained by the Imperial Parliament. 
 
 Mr. Rathbone (the Gladstonian member for Carnarvonshire) 
 spoke very strongly in favour of the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Arnold-Forster (Belfast) gave instances in which the 
 National League held meetings, and passed sentence of fine on 
 men who had gone against their orders, and in which instances 
 the sentences were enforced by outrage. This was proved before 
 the County Court Judge, who said, "If these scoundrels acted 
 thus, they committed crime against the Queen." 
 
 It was contended that such conduct foreshadowed what 
 would be done by a Parliament controlled by the National 
 League. 
 
 Mr. Arnold-Forster said that the Bill was a sorry message 
 of peace to Ulster. " Night after night" he said, " we see all 
 .safeguards for our lives and liberties refused^ and we are to 
 be handed over without -protection to those who have acted in 
 a manner strongly condemned even by the members of the -present 
 ^Government who are promoting this legislation"
 
 64 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 The discussion was continued amidst loud interruptions from 
 the Irish members, who were annoyed at the charges brought 
 against them. They were challenged, however, to speak and 
 defend themselves, but they were silent, and the Government 
 even had nothing to say. It was pointed out that the Govern- 
 ment reckoned on carrying their measure with a rush, and without 
 discussion, so that the rash nature of their proposals might not 
 be exposed. 
 
 The amendment was, however, defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 3$ hours 
 
 Government majority 37 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 14 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 18 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JUNE 21st TWENTY-FIFTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IV. Continued.) 
 
 Mr. Plunket (Dublin University) moved an amendment to 
 protect the constitution, -privileges, and endowment of Trinity 
 College, Dublin, and the University of Dublin. It was shown 
 that all tests had been removed, and that, as at present con- 
 stituted, the college was open to all classes and creeds. It was 
 also shown by speeches and writings of the Roman Catholic 
 priests that the Catholic Church were in deadly opposition to this 
 united national education, whether in school or college, and that 
 the priests had denounced it as dangerous to faith and morals. 
 Under the Bill the privileges and the whole constitution of the 
 University could be changed on an address being presented for 
 that purpose by the Irish Parliament. Mr. Plunket quoted a 
 speech of Archbishop Walsh, made in 1886, in which he called 
 Trinity College 
 
 " that ancient citadel of ascendency and exclusiveness which has 
 stood for centuries on College Green." 
 
 Referring to the Home Rule Bill of 1886, the Archbishop 
 said : 
 
 " Any bribes would be offered to induce them to let it remain ; 
 but no bribes, no offers, no endowments, no honours that made 
 a University acceptable would be acceptable to the Roman Catho- 
 lic hierarchy so long as Dublin University existed as a citadel 
 of any education that was not Catholic." 
 
 It was urged that this was plain language, and ought not to 
 be ignored. Mr. Gladstone had to admit the action of the 
 Roman Catholic prelates in the past, but he said that they now 
 used more moderate language. He said it was monstrous to 
 take this institution out of the purview of the Irish Parliament.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 65 
 
 Mr. Courtney said it was not a question of handing over 
 this higher education to a united nation, but to an ascendant 
 majority, governed by an ecclesiastical party. We ought to 
 preserve the institution as a national one under the government 
 of the Imperial Parliament. 
 
 It was urged by the Government that the Irish Parliament 
 would not attempt any injustice to the University, but abundant 
 proofs were brought forward as to what was likely to take place. 
 Mr. Plunket, as member for the University, pleaded for the 
 protection asked for in the amendment as the only means of 
 preserving the national character of the institution, and the only 
 way in which it could be prevented from being turned into a 
 Roman Catholic institution. He concluded an eloquent appeal 
 on behalf of the University as follows: 
 
 " I can plead before any assembly her merits. The attitude of 
 the Roman Catholic clergy makes us claim for the University 
 that" here in the clear light, in the free, fresh air of this ancient 
 and famous Imperial Parliament, and here alone, her fate shall 
 be decided." 
 
 The amendment was, nevertheless, defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 3! hours 
 
 Government majority 42 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 19 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 12 
 
 Dr. Rentoul (East Down) moved a similar amendment to 
 protect the national character of Queeris College, Belfast. 
 
 He pleaded that the three Queen's Colleges Belfast, Gal- 
 way, and Cork were at present unsectarian ; were open to all ; 
 and that the doors were shut to none. In Galway and Cork the 
 bulk of the students were Roman Catholics, but a large number 
 of Protestants were receiving education there as well. The 
 priests have always done their best to keep students out of these 
 colleges, which they call by the name of " Godless institutions." 
 The Queen's College at Belfast was used mainly as a training 
 college for Presbyterians and other Protestants, though being 
 o-p'en to all. These bodies have no other means of education 
 than the colleges in question, and it was contended that the fears 
 in regard to them were well grounded, and that the priestly party 
 who hate these colleges would lay their hands on them and 
 change them into sectarian establishments. 
 
 The amendment was resisted and defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about hour 
 
 Government majority 41 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 1 8 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 12
 
 66 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 THURSDAY, JUNE 22nd TWENTY-SIXTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 To-day Mr. Gladstone brought forward the new financial 
 clauses of the Home Rule Bill, in the place of the old ones, which 
 had broken down through errors detected in them. 
 
 Under these clauses the whole principle of the financial 
 arrangements was changed, and it was provided that one-third of 
 the whole of the revenue of Ireland should be applied towards the 
 Imperial charges of the United Kingdom. It was so arranged 
 that the Irish Government should have a surplus of 500, ooo 
 per annum, which, it was admitted, was to come out of the 
 British taxpayer's pocket. This sudden change of the financial 
 arrangements was subjected to considerable criticism ; but the 
 debate on those arrangements was postponed. 
 
 The discussion on Clause IV. was then continued. 
 
 Mr. Cochrane moved an amendment to -prevent the Irish 
 Parliament passing laws to injure or put down any voluntary 
 lawful institution, lawfully constituted according to the laws of 
 the United Kingdom. This amendment was intended to protect 
 the Society of Freemasons, whose members numbered about ten 
 thousand in Ireland, and other societies of a similar character. 
 It was shown that the Freemasons' Societies specially needed pro- 
 tection. They were benevolent institutions, possessed of con- 
 siderable funds, but they were violently opposed by the Irish 
 priesthood. Instances were brought forward in which they had 
 been scandalously treated. Mr. Cochrane quoted a pastoral 
 issued by Archbishop Walsh, and read in the Irish Churches, to 
 the effect that the Holy See had repeatedly condemned the insti- 
 tution of Freemasons had forbidden Roman Catholics to be 
 members, and had ordered that no help should be given to it 
 under penalty of incurring the severest strictures of the Church. 
 
 Mr. Cochrane quoted a letter by a Freemason, Mr. Lawrence 
 Burke, Roscommon, dated June 6th, 1893, which said that his 
 (Mr. Burke's) father had been refused the rites of burial by the 
 parish priest because he had lived and died a Freemason ; that an 
 appeal was made to the bishop to allow the service to be held for 
 the sake of his wife and daughter; and that the bishop refused, 
 sending a telegram as follows : " The law of the Church forbids 
 rites and attendance of clergy." 
 
 Other instances of oppression were advanced, and a quota- 
 tion from a Catholic newspaper was read to the effect that 
 " between the prelates of God's Church and Masonry there could 
 never be either peace or pact." 
 
 It was urged that the protection which the amendment would 
 give was absolutely necessary. 
 
 The members of the Committee seemed impressed with the 
 defenceless position which " Freemasons," " Free Gardeners," and 
 other similar societies would be in under the Bill as it stood.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 67 
 
 The Irish Nationalist members were determined, however, to 
 have no concessions, and the Government sat silent as evidence 
 after evidence was given for the necessity of the protection. 
 
 The debate was a disagreeable one to the Government, 
 especially to Mr. Morley, who has written so much in by-gone 
 times in favour of curtailing priestly power. He, therefore, 
 after a short discussion, moved the closure in order to bring the 
 matter to an end. Strong expressions of dissatisfaction were 
 made at this proceeding, which left all the arguments unanswered, 
 and loud cries of indignation were kept up for some time at the 
 action of the Government. It was declared that the electors of 
 Great Britain would have had their eyes opened if they could 
 have witnessed the scene during this discussion, and the action 
 of the Government in respect to it. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about \ hour 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 18 
 
 FRIDAY, JUNE 23rd TWENTY-SEVENTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IV. Continued.} 
 
 It was then moved " That Clause IV. stand part of the Bill" 
 It was pointed out that this clause was of the most com- 
 plicated and extensive character; that the numerous matters dealt 
 with were sufficient to nil four or five Bills in Parliament ; and 
 that the various subjects had not been and could not be 
 adequately discussed in the time which had been allotted to the 
 clause. The clause dealt with safeguards which affected the 
 Irish minorities. The Opposition had tried to protect the Pro- 
 testant minority, but though absolute pledges had been given by 
 Gladstonian candidates on this head, yet they now declined to 
 fulfil them. It was now clear that the Irish Parliament might 
 alter the whole educational system of Ireland, make it sectarian, 
 and tax the Protestants for carrying it out; that all the safe- 
 guards of the elementary system of education, at present so much 
 valued by the Protestant population, as well as those affecting 
 training schools, colleges and universities were destroyed by this 
 clause as it stood. The various societies of Freemasons, Good 
 Templars, etc., as well as all the Protestant denominations, 
 Methodists, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc., were all deprived of 
 any efficient safeguards. With a Parliament in Dublin under the 
 sway of the priesthood, and the Irish members in the Parliament 
 at Westminster to control the legislation there, it was a poor 
 look-out both for the proceedings in the British Parliament and 
 for the minorities in Ireland. It was complained that the Govern- 
 ment had evaded and concealed the meaning of the clause, in
 
 68 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 spite of repeated questions, until the discussion came on ; that 
 then the meaning had literally to be dragged out of them; that 
 when the disastrous character of the clause became clear by dis- 
 cussion, amendments had been refused and discussions closured ; 
 that it was evident from the admissions of the Government there 
 was a standing corn-pact between the Government and the Irish 
 Nationalist Party to do all these things; and that that agreement 
 had been kept absolutely secret from the British -population. 
 
 The Government were challenged to reply to all these accusa- 
 tions, but little or no reply was given, and the motion " That 
 Clause IV. stand -part of the Bill" was, after only two hours' 
 discussion, passed without a division. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28th TWENTY-EIGHTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 Clause V. was as follows: 
 
 " (i) The executive -power in Ireland shall continue vested in 
 Her Majesty the Queen, and the Lord Lieutenant, on behalf 
 of Her Majesty, shall exercise any -prerogatives or other 
 executive -power of the Queen the exercise of which may be 
 delegated to him by Her Majesty, and shall, in Her Afajesly's 
 name, summon, -prorogue and dissolve the Irish Legislature; (2) 
 There shall lie an Executive Committee of the Privy Council 
 of Ireland, to aid. and advise in the government of Ireland, 
 being of such numbers, and corn-prising persons holding such 
 offices, as Her Majesty may think fit, or as may be directed 
 by Irish Act; (3) The Lord Lieutenant shall, on the advice of 
 the said Executive Committee, give or withhold the assent of 
 Her Majesty to Bills -passed by the two Houses of the Irish 
 Legislature, subject nevertheless to any instructions given by 
 Her Majesty in res-pect of any such Bill." 
 
 Mr. Hanbury (Preston) moved an amendment to secure that 
 the Executive should continue to be vested in the Queen and the 
 Lord Lieutenant. 
 
 It was pointed out that the Lord Lieutenant would, under 
 the Bill, be in a dual position he would be under the Irish 
 Parliament and under the Imperial Parliament as well ; that 
 collisions and difficulties might arise between the two Execu- 
 tives; that the Lord Lieutenant would have two conflicting kinds 
 of responsibility; and that of necessity great confusion would 
 arise unless the amendment was accepted to make matters clear. 
 
 The Government fell back on the theoretical supremacy of 
 the Imperial Parliament over Ireland as it existed over our 
 colonies, which, as has been shown, was a mere paper supremacy. 
 
 The Irish Nationalists opposed the amendment, which was 
 therefore defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 3 hours 
 
 Government majority 29 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government... 13,
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 69 
 
 THURSDAY, JUNE 29th TWENTY-NINTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 Clause 5 should have been continued to-day, but Mr. Glad- 
 stone moved a resolution which is known as the " gagging resolu- 
 tion" and which provided that the discussion on various sections 
 or " Compartments " of the Bill should be concluded on certain 
 dates, no matter whether those sections or compartments had 
 been discussed or not. The first Compartment, containing 
 Clauses 5 to 8, both inclusive, was to be concluded at ten o'clock 
 on Thursday, July the 6th; the second Compartment, containing 
 Clauses 9 to 26, both inclusive, was to be concluded at ten o'clock 
 on Thursday, July I3th; the third Compartment, containing 
 Clauses 27 to 40, both inclusive, was to be concluded at ten o'clock 
 on Thursday, July the 2Oth; the fourth Compartment, containing 
 all the postponed clauses, new Government clauses, schedules, 
 and preamble, was to be concluded on Thursday, July 2/th, at 
 ten o'clock. 
 
 Thus every clause, schedule, and every other part of the 
 Bill, no matter what, was to be finished at the last date, whether 
 discussed or not. 
 
 Mr. T. W. Russell (South Tyrone) moved an amendment to 
 this resolution as follows: 
 
 " That inasmuch as the Government of Ireland Bill proposes 
 to frame and enact a new Constitution for Great Britian and 
 Ireland, under which the constitutional rights of many of Her 
 Majesty's subjects will be -permanently and injuriously affected, 
 this House declines to sanction a proposal which directly inter- 
 feres with the free discussion of that measure by the Parlia- 
 mentary representatives of the people." 
 
 It was urged that it was quite impossible fairly to discuss 
 even one clause out of the many clauses in each compartment 
 during the five short sittings which were allotted to such com- 
 partment. It was shown that in other countries no change in the 
 Constitution could be brought about without a two-thirds or some 
 other large majority; whereas the Bill in question proposed to 
 alter the whole Constitution of the British Empire in a few weeks 
 with practically no discussion, whilst, at the same time, the vital 
 questions of the retention of the Irish members in Parliament, of 
 the financial arrangements, and of the burdens sought to be 
 placed on the British taxpayer, were all to be forced through 
 against the wish and against the opposition of a majority of the 
 representatives of Great Britain. All this was to be done at the 
 instigation and by the votes of Irish Nationalist members. It 
 was declared by the Unionist Party that such a proceeding was 
 an outrage on Parliamentary Government, and that a Bill forced 
 through in this manner could have no -moral weight with the 
 Ulster people and the other loyal minorities in Ireland. 
 
 Scathing speeches were delivered by Mr. Balfour, Mr. 
 Chamberlain, and other Unionist members. The whole proceed-
 
 70 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 ing was characterised as a shameless one. No answer, however, 
 was given by the Government, and the amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 6J hours 
 
 Government majority 20, 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25 
 
 Mr. Russell's amendment having been thus defeated, the 
 debate on the " gagging motion " itself was continued. 
 
 The adjournment of the debate was moved by Baron 
 Rothschild, on the ground that such a motion could not be dis- 
 posed of in a single sitting. This was resisted. The Unionists 
 declared that the Government were no longer acting with any 
 British responsibility, but were obeying the dictates of the Irish 
 Nationalists in order to retain office. 
 
 The motion for adjournment was, however, defeated by the 
 small majority of only twenty-six. 
 
 It being now three o'clock in the morning (the twelve o'clock 
 rule having been suspended), the Unionist Party determined that 
 the discussion should not be finished. They declared that it 
 was impossible for any Government to destroy the rights of 
 Parliament whilst there was a majority of British members in 
 opposition, and with a Government majority of only twenty-six: 
 by which the last motion was carried ; and that, rather than allow 
 free discussion to be throttled, they were ready to sit all night. 
 Lord Cranborne then moved the adjournment of the debate, 
 ;vhich was defeated by a majority of twenty-eight; but the 
 Opposition were so determined, that the debate itself was 
 adjourned, the House thereupon rising (at four o'clock in the 
 morning), and the Speaker having been in the chair for thirteen 
 hours. 
 
 FRIDAY, JUNE 30th THIRTIETH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 The debate on the " gagging motion " was continued. 
 
 The Prime Minister had to admit that he " loathed " the thing 
 he was doing. 
 
 It was evident, however, that he had no option, but was com- 
 pelled by his Irish masters to make this further concession to 
 them. British members, therefore, who were in a majority in 
 the House, and also the whole liberties of the Irish minorities, 
 were thus to be placed in the hands of men, some of whom had 
 been convicted of conspiracy against the interests of Great 
 Britain. The Bill, it was contended, though shown to the Irish 
 Nationalists, who knew all about it, had been carefully con- 
 cealed for six years from the people of Gr&at Britain, and it was 
 now sought to force it down the throats of Parliament, by a small 
 majority obtained, not on Home Rule, but on other questions at 
 the general election.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 71 
 
 The Gladstonian members sat silent when they were chal- 
 lenged to say if their pledges to their constituents at the election 
 were not violated in every way by the action they were now 
 taking. It was declared that each section of it required a close 
 and lengthened examination. Instead of this examination, the 
 question as to the law of conspiracy had, it was pointed out, 
 been disposed of in just about an hour's discussion; the great 
 question of bounties was also disposed of in about an hour; and 
 the discussion of the question of Irish education under the Bill 
 was closured in about the same time. The ninth clause itself, 
 which was of such enormous and overwhelming importance, and 
 which was to settle whether the Irish shall be present in the Im- 
 perial Parliament to control British legislation, was to be settled, 
 under the " gagging resolution," in about four hours. 
 
 Mr. Balfour said that he had no doubt the Government were 
 sick of the discussion, because it showed the rotten character of 
 their Bill, but that, speaking on behalf of the majority in Great 
 Britain, they desired to continue the discussion in order to show 
 up to the constituencies the naked wickedness of the measure ! 
 
 The various amendments, however, were defeated by the 
 Government with small majorities ranging from twenty-five to 
 thirty- four ; and with majorities of British members against them 
 ranging from nineteen to twenty-two. 
 
 When the amendments had been disposed of, the " gagging 
 resolution" itself was put to the House and carried. 
 
 The discussion on this most important reso- 
 lution, and on the amendments, lasted 
 about 10 hours 
 
 Government majority 32 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 9 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 23 
 
 MONDAY, JULY 3rd THIRTY-FIRST DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause V. was then continued.*} 
 
 Lord Wolmer moved an amendment to empower the Lord 
 Lieutenant, acting under instructions from the Crown, to appoint 
 executive officers in Ireland charged with the enforcement of 
 Imperial legislation and the decrees of Imperial tribunals, and 
 to secure that the constabulary should be used in support of the 
 officers of the law appointed to carry out these duties. 
 
 It was pointed out that under the Bill as it stood, there were 
 no means of enforcing the decisions of the Judges or the orders of 
 the Lord Lieutenant, or the payment of any monies due; that it 
 was useless to depend on the Irish Executive for executing these 
 orders, as the Irish Executive would be quite independent of the 
 Imperial Parliament, and responsible only to the Irish Legisla- 
 ture. After six years, according to the Bill, there would not be
 
 72 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 a single executive officer left in Ireland under the direct control 
 of the Imperial Parliament, so that the Irish Legislature might 
 resist the Imperial law and the decision of the Imperial Judges, 
 and there was no power to withstand them, except by falling back 
 on the army and navy. The threats of the Irish Nationalists as 
 to what they would do when they had the power were again re- 
 ferred to, and it was shown by the confession of Irish members 
 themselves that the Irish Executive could not be trusted to carry 
 out any Imperial law. 
 
 The discussion on the amendment was a very stormy one. 
 The Irish determined that there should be no concessions, and the 
 Government were obliged to resist the amendment, which was 
 accordingly defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 21 
 
 TUESDAY, JULY 4th THIRTY-SECOND DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause V. Continued.} 
 
 Mr. Arnold-Forster (Belfast) moved an amendment to the 
 effect that the prerogative of mercy should not be exercised by 
 the Lord Lieutenant except on the advice of the Imperial 
 Ministry. 
 
 It was pointed out that if the prerogative of mercy was exer- 
 cised on the advice of the Irish Government great evils might be 
 done. Dynamitards might be released; men who had now fled 
 the country charged with murder might return and be pardoned; 
 and outrage-mongers, moonlighters, and those who enforced the 
 orders of the Land League might all have their offences con- 
 doned. 
 
 Sir Henry James said that the prerogative of mercy should 
 remain, as at the present time, exercised only on the advice of 
 the Imperial Ministry, and that, if the amendment was not 
 accepted, the administration of all criminal justice would be 
 handed over purely and simply to the Irish Executive. 
 
 The discussion on the amendment was characterised by con- 
 tinual interruption from the Irish Nationalists. 
 
 Mr. Arnold-Forster was not allowed to speak without 
 constant noise and interruption. 
 
 The Government resisted the amendment, and, by the aid 
 of the Irish Nationalists, it was therefore defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 37 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 14 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 21
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 73 
 
 Sir Henry James moved an amendment providing that the 
 Irish Cabinet should consist of persons appointed by Her Majesty, 
 and not by the Irish Legislature. 
 
 He pointed out that the scheme of the Bill as it stood was 
 crude and unworkable, and he stated that he hoped the Govern- 
 ment would enter upon the discussion with some desire to meet 
 the objections urged against it. 
 
 The Government resisted the amendment, which was 
 defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i| hours 
 
 Government majority 33 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 10 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 20 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JULY 5th THIRTY-THIRD DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause V. was continued.} 
 
 THURSDAY, JULY 6th THIRTY-FOURTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause V . Continued.} 
 
 Lord Wolmer moved an amendment to the effect that the 
 Lord Lieutenant should not give or withhold his assent to Bills 
 passed by the Irish Legislature on the advice of the Irish Execu- 
 tive Committee. 
 
 The Government resisted the amendment, and could only 
 advance their usual argument, viz., that of trusting the Lord 
 Lieutenant and the Irish Parliament. It was urged, however, 
 that this again raised the question of the value of the veto. 
 
 Sir Henry James pointed out that the Opposition, and there- 
 fore the majority of the British public, had been over and over 
 again told the veto of the Lord Lieutenant was to be the great 
 safeguard; but that the Bill proposed to give that veto to a man 
 who could not exercise it which reduced the Bill to an absurdity. 
 What was the value, he asked, of a veto given by the Executive 
 Committee in Ireland to the very men who thought it right to 
 carry the Bill which really ought to be vetoed ? 
 
 Mr. Balfour said that if the Government would not accept 
 the amendment he hoped they would never again throw the veto 
 in their faces. Let them, now that they had the opportunity, 
 make the veto a reality, or let them for ever hold their peace 
 about it.
 
 74 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2j hours 
 
 Government majority 42 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented IQ 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 15 
 
 Lord Cranborne (Rochester) moved an amendment to enable 
 the Lord Lieutenant to veto any -part of a Bill. 
 
 He showed that there might be a Bill generally approved of, 
 but that there might be a single clause or so in it which would 
 do great injustice to the minorities in Ireland. He therefore 
 urged that there ought to be a power in the Home Rule Bill 
 to enable the Lord Lieutenant to veto an objectionable clause 
 instead of having to veto the remainder of the Bill, which might 
 be of a beneficial character. 
 
 The Government opposed the amendment, which was re- 
 jected. 
 
 The discussion lasted about \\ hours 
 
 Government majority 46 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 23 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 15 
 
 Lord Wolmer moved an amendment for reserving -power to 
 the Queen not only to give or reserve her consent to a Bill, but 
 to disallow it altogether. He said that this provision was found 
 in the Constitution of all our Colonies, and that it had been 
 acted upon over and over again with great benefit to the integrity 
 of the Imperial legislation. 
 
 Mr. Balfour argued in favour of the amendment, pointing 
 out the great advantages the amendment would secure, how that 
 its provisions acted well in the Colonial Parliaments, and that 
 it was absolutely necessary that it should be inserted in the Bill. 
 Mr. Balfour was speaking at 10 o'clock, the hour at which the 
 gagging resolution came into operation. The Chairman rose to 
 put the question, and was met by loud cries of "Shame " and 
 " Gag " from the House. 
 
 The division on Lord Wolmer's amendment was then taken. 
 
 Government majority 38 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 15 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 18 
 
 The motion was then made that Clause 5 be added to the 
 Bill, and there were at the same time loud and prolonged Unionist 
 cries of "No" mingled with shouts of "Shame" and "Gag." 
 
 Discussion None 
 
 The motion was not and could not be dis- 
 cussed in conseqtience of the gag. 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 20
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 75 
 
 The announcement of these small majorities was received by 
 prolonged Opposition cheers. 
 
 The addition of Clause 6, which deals with the important 
 question of the composition of the Irish Legislative Council, which 
 is to be a sort of House of Lords of the Irish Legislature, was 
 then moved. 
 
 Discussion None 
 
 Government majority 15 
 
 Majority against the Government after de- 
 ducting the 23 members by which Ire- 
 land is over-represented 8 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 40 
 
 At the announcement of these numbers the whole Unionist 
 Opposition rose to their feet, and a scene of great uproar and 
 confusion ensued. 
 
 The addition of Clause 7 was then moved. 
 
 This clause deals with the corn-position of the Legislative 
 Assembly, which is to be the House of Commons of Ireland. It 
 is a clause which settles all the numbers of members, etc., and is 
 one of the most important in the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 36 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 13 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 17 
 
 The addition of Clause 8 was then moved. 
 
 This clause provides for the settlement of disagreements 
 which may arise between the two Houses of the Irish Parliament. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 32 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 9 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 24 
 
 The sitting then came to an end. 
 
 Great indignation was expressed that the important clauses 
 referred to had been passed without discussion and without the 
 power of any possible amendment being made to any of them. 
 Some of the Gladstonians had evidently walked out without 
 voting, and several voted on one occasion against the Govern- 
 ment. Loud cheers for the Unionist party were given when 
 the majority fell to the lowest point yet reached, viz., 15. 
 
 FRIDAY, JULY 7th THIRTY-FIFTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 After other business which occupied most of the sitting was 
 disposed of, Clause 9 was proceeded with.
 
 76 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 This clause provided that the Irish members should remain in 
 the Imperial House of Commons after they had a Parliament of 
 their own in Dublin. The number to be retained was eighty, and 
 they were to vote on .Imperial questions only, and not on British 
 questions, so far as a distinction between two sets of questions 
 could be secured. The discussion on the clause was only just 
 entered on when the hour arrived for the adjournment of the 
 House. 
 
 MONDAY, JULY 10th THIRTY-SIXTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IX. continued.} 
 
 Mr. Heneage (Grimsby) moved an amendment to provide 
 that after the Irish had a Parliament of their own they should 
 cease to return members to the Imperial House of Commons. 
 
 The impossible character of the arrangement of having Irish 
 members voting on some questions and not voting on others; and 
 of putting the Government in a majority to-day and in a minority 
 to-morrow was pointed out. 
 
 It was urged that after giving Ireland a Parliament with 
 full power over its own concerns, with an executive responsible 
 to that Parliament, over which the Imperial Government had no 
 control it would be intolerable that Irish members should be 
 at Westminster to control British legislation, to hamper British 
 proceedings, and to impose taxes on the British people which 
 Irish people would not have to pay; whilst, at the same time, the 
 British Parliament would have no right to interfere with Irish 
 concerns. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain quoted a speech from Lord Rosebery, 
 showing how ridiculous the scheme under consideration would 
 make the British Parliament in the eyes of the world. 
 
 He also referred to a speech from Sir George Trevelyan, in 
 which that gentleman declared that 
 
 " The Irish will not only be absolute masters of their own 
 Parliament in Dublin, but they will be absolute masters in 
 our Parliament at Westminster." 
 
 Speeches from other members of the Government were quoted 
 in which they strongly declared against the proposition. It was 
 recalled to mind how that the Prime Minister had said on more 
 than one occasion that it " passed the wit of man " to devise a 
 scheme for doing that which the clause now attempted to do, and 
 that he had pledged himself to be no party to any proposal to 
 retain Irish members in the British Parliament after they had a 
 Parliament of their own. 
 
 Mr. Balfour quoted a speech from Mr. Morley in 1886, at 
 Newcastle, wherein he said : 
 
 " I do not care where you draw the line in theory, but you 
 may depend upon it there is no power on earth which can pre- 
 vent Irish members, if retained at Westminster, from being in 
 the future Parliament what they have ever been in the past 
 the arbitrators and masters of English policy, of English 
 legislative business, and of the rise and fall of British Adminis- 
 trations."
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 77 
 
 Mr. Gladstone rose to move the closure, when there were 
 considerable manifestations of disapprobation, mingled with cries 
 of " Shame." There was great indignation at this important 
 amendment having been closured with practically no answer and. 
 no defence from the Government. 
 
 The closure was carried by a majority of thirty. 
 
 Mr. Heneage's amendment was then put and defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 4i hours 
 
 Government majority 31 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented 8 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 27 
 
 TUESDAY, JULY 11th THIRTY-SEVENTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IX. Continued.} 
 
 Sir Charles Dilke moved an amendment for the purpose of 
 altering the constitution of the future Irish constituencies as set 
 forth in Schedule 2. 
 
 It was pointed out that the small constituencies in Ireland 
 have the same representation as many of the constituencies in 
 England and Wales containing 12,000 and 14,000, and in some 
 cases 18,000 electors. For instance, Newry, Kilkenny, and Gal- 
 way, with about 5,000 electors each, have three members; while 
 Cardiff, with 18,000 electors, hasionly one; in other words, the. 
 Irish constituencies have eleven times the amount of representa- 
 tion of districts in Great Britain. 
 
 The amendment was, however, defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 30 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 7 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 28 
 
 Mr. Seton-Karr (St. Helens) moved an amendment with the 
 object of limiting the number of Irish members in the House 
 of Commons to forty-eight instead of eighty. 
 
 In the course of the discussion, Mr. Brodrick (Guildford) 
 referred incidentally to the Irish as " an impecunious and gar- 
 rulous race." The Irish members chose to apply this reference 
 to themselves, and Mr. Sexton declared that such language "was 
 grossly impertinent." Scenes of great disorder followed. The 
 Chairman ruled that Mr. Sexton must withdraw his expression 
 as being out of order. Mr. Sexton refused, and repeated the 
 offence. A discreditable scene followed, lasting for a long time. 
 This was caused by the objectionable conduct of the Irish 
 Nationalist members. Not only was the ruling of the Chairman 
 disregarded, but Mr. Milman, the Clerk at the table, was in-
 
 78 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 suited. Mr. Morley and Mr. Gladstone interfered, but only in 
 a half-hearted way, and failed in their duty to sustain the 
 authority of the Chairman, who, and the Clerk, were so rudely 
 assailed. The Prime Minister, in effect, simply asked Mr. Sexton 
 to accede to the wishes of the chair; he did not exhibit the 
 slightest firmness in support of the Chairman's ruling. The 
 Chairman requested Mr. Sexton to retire in accordance with the 
 standing order. This Mr. Sexton declined to do, until the 
 Prime Minister expressed a hope that he would do so. Mr. Sex- 
 ton then retired, whereupon the ruling of the Chairman was 
 again challenged. The scene, altogether, was a disgraceful one, 
 and showed to what a pitch of excitement the House was arriv- 
 ing through the disorderly and aggressive action of the Irish 
 members; through the weakness of the Government in allowing 
 such conduct; and through the conduct of the Government in 
 imposing the " gag " and closure on the free discussion of the 
 important questions in hand. 
 
 Mr. Seton-Karr's amendment was defeated by a majority 
 of thirty-three. 
 
 Dr. Rentoul (East Down) then moved an amendment with 
 the object of giving the Royal University of Ireland two mem- 
 bers of Parliament. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about \ hour 
 
 Government majority 29 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 24 
 
 Mr. Parker Smith (Partick) moved an amendment to the 
 effect that Dublin University should continue to be re-presented 
 in Parliament. 
 
 This amendment was under discussion when the House 
 adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JULY 12th THIRTY-EIGHTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IX. Continued.} 
 
 Mr. Parker Smith's amendment with respect to Dublin Uni- 
 versity was proceeded with. 
 
 The arguments against the disfranchisement of the Univer- 
 sity were stated. Fresh arguments were brought forward, show- 
 ing that the University might be changed from its national to a 
 sectarian character, or be dealt with in any other way that suited 
 a Roman Catholic Parliament in Dublin, and that there would 
 be no representative in the House of Commons to plead the cause
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 79 
 
 of the University. The Government, however, refused all con- 
 cessions, and the amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 4i hours 
 
 Government majority 32 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 9 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 22 
 
 At half-past four Mr. Gladstone rose to make an important 
 alteration in sub-sections 3 and 4 of the clause, which sub-sec- 
 tions dealt with the retention of Irish members in the British 
 Parliament. As the Bill stood, those members were to be allowed 
 to vote only on Imperial matters a course of procedure which 
 has already been described as the " In-and-Out " plan. This 
 arrangement was now to be done away with, and Mr. Gladstone 
 announced that the Government had decided to retain the eighty 
 Irish members in the British Parliament, with unlimited voting 
 power ; that is to say, they were to vote on every question which 
 came before Parliament, precisely as at the present time. They 
 were to have absolute control over Irish affairs in the Parliament 
 at Dublin, and at the same time to have the control of British 
 affairs in the Parliament at Westminster. 
 
 Mr. Rathbone (Gladstonian member for Carnarvon) made a 
 strong speech against the proposal. He declared that 
 
 " It would largely increase the difficulties of British legisla-. 
 tion, and demoralise our whole political life." He could not, 
 he said, " conceive that any such inequitable or unworkable 
 arrangement could be accepted, or would be accepted by the 
 constituencies of Great Britain." 
 
 He showed that if the Irish members were to take part in 
 British legislation in which they had no interest, they would 
 inevitably use their position to obtain Imperial credit and Im- 
 perial resources for Irish objects; and that they would be put 
 under the inevitable temptation to employ their powers to impede 
 legislation in order to force fresh concessions from Parliament. 
 
 Mr. Wallace (Gladstonian member for Edinburgh) followed 
 with an able speech, also in opposition to the proposals of the 
 Government. He said no weaker or more inconclusive reasons 
 could be given for the change than had been given by the Prime 
 Minister. It amounted to the entire revolutionising of the Bill. 
 He said that 
 
 " The Bill was no longer a measure to give self-government to 
 Ireland, but became a proposal to take away self-government 
 from Great Britain." 
 
 The honourable member was speaking at half-past five, which 
 was the hour for adjournment.
 
 80 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 THURSDAY, JULY 13th THIRTY-NINTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause IX. Continued.} 
 
 Mr. Wallace continued his speech against the new proposal 
 of the Government to give the Irish members power of unlimited 
 voting. He said that the proposal was one for " putting Great 
 Britain under the hoof of Ireland." He went on to say that the 
 Irish were " to-night going to vote themselves into the dominion 
 over British affairs with which they ought to have nothing to 
 do." He added that his fellow Home Rulers might say, " We 
 will get votes honestly if we can; but by all means let us get 
 votes." If that was what they said, he " for one would refuse 
 to join what would be," in his opinion, " political rascality." 
 He warned the Government that when the Bill went down to the 
 country and was understood by the people, it would create great 
 opposition. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone made a reply, in which he did not deal with 
 the arguments, but went into irrelevant matter as to the conduct 
 of the Opposition when in office in 1886 in the appointment of 
 the Irish Land Commission. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain pointed out that that had nothing to do 
 with the question. He reminded Mr. Gladstone of his speech 
 at Manchester on June 25th, 1886, in which he said: 
 
 " I will not be a party to a legislative body to manage Irish 
 concerns, and at the same time to have Irish members in Lon- 
 don acting and voting on English and Scotch questions." 
 
 He pointed out that both with regard to the financial arrange- 
 ments of Home Rule and the retention of Irish members, these 
 great changes had been made suddenly and without warning, 
 that the secret had been kept up to within a few hours of the 
 time when the closure would be applied and all discussion 
 stopped. It was deceiving the House of Commons and the 
 Country. On account of the closure it would be impossible to 
 discuss these proposals, but the issue was now plain before the 
 constituencies. He concluded by saying: 
 
 " That issue is, whether the interests of Great Britain are to 
 be controlled by delegates from Ireland nominated by priests, 
 elected by illiterates, and subsidised by the enemies of this 
 country. Upon that issue we shall appeal confidently to the 
 verdict of the country." 
 
 Mr. Atherley-Jones (Gladstonian member for North-West 
 Durham) protested against the proposals of the Government. 
 He spoke amidst rude and unmannerly interruptions from the 
 Irish Nationalist members. He said this was a vital question, 
 and declared that though he might be stopped by clamour in 
 the House, yet he believed that he spoke the opinions of the 
 people of Great Britain. He was speaking when the hour of 10 
 arrived, at which the gagging resolution of the Government came 
 into force. The Chairman rose amid loud shouts of " Gag "
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 81 
 
 and "Shame" to put the question that eighty Irish members be 
 retained in Parliament to vote on all questions. 
 
 The resolution was carried. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 5 hours 
 
 Government majority 27 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 4 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 34 
 
 The announcement of these figures was received with loud 
 Unionist cheers. 
 
 The question That Clause IX. as thus amended be added 
 to the Bill, was then put and carried. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 29 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 32 
 
 The addition of Clause 10 was then moved and carried. 
 
 Clause n, which referred to the revenues and income-tax, 
 and Clauses 12 and 13, which referred to the financial arrange- 
 ments between the United Kingdom, were, on the motion of the 
 Government, struck out of the Bill. 
 
 Clauses 14, 15, and 16 were postponed. 
 
 Clause 17, which referred to local taxation, was struck out 
 of the Bill. 
 
 It was then moved that Clause 18 be added to the Bill. 
 This clause provided that the imposition of taxes should originate 
 in the Legislative Assembly in Ireland. The clause was car- 
 ried. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 27 
 
 Clause 19, which refers to the Exchequer Judges and to 
 their powers over matters connected with the revenues, election 
 petitions, etc., was then moved and was added to the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 27 
 
 Clauses 20 and 21, which referred to the Post and Tele- 
 graph Offices and the Post Office Savings Bank, were struck 
 out of the Bill.
 
 82 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Clause 22 was then moved. This clause abolishes appeals 
 from the courts in Ireland to the House of Lords, and substi- 
 tutes appeals to the Queen in Council. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 33 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented I0 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 23 
 
 Clause 23 was then moved and added to the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented I2 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 26 
 
 Clause 24, which refers to the appointment of the Lord 
 Lieutenant, was then added to the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25 
 
 Clause 25, which refers to Crown lands, buildings, etc., 
 in Ireland, was then added to the Bill without discussion by a 
 majority of thirty-five, and a British majority against the 
 Government of twenty-six. 
 
 Clause 26, which refers to the appointment and removal of 
 judges, was also carried without discussion by a majority of 
 thirty-four, but with a British majority against the Government 
 of twenty-seven. 
 
 This was the last of the clauses included in the second " com- 
 partment," and the small majorities by which they were carried 
 -were received with loud cheers by the Unionists. 
 
 FRIDAY, JULY 14th FORTIETH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 The third "compartment" of the Bill, which included 14 
 clauses (27 to 40, both inclusive), stood next for discussion, but 
 before proceeding further it was necessary, according to Parlia- 
 mentary rules, to move a formal resolution to give power to 
 the Irish Government to make the various payments required 
 under the Home Rule Bill. Mr. Morley accordingly moved the 
 financial resolution, and his speech opened up a discussion on 
 this new scheme of finance, in place of the original scheme, which 
 had broken down. 
 
 The proposals were criticised by the Opposition. It was de- 
 clared to be " cruelly unfair " to the British people to tax them 
 for the Irish Government, and at the same time to permit eighty
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 83 
 
 Irish members in the British Parliament to control British affairs. 
 In the Home Rule Bill of 1886 the Prime Minister said that the 
 fair share of the Irish contribution to Imperial expenses was 
 one-fifteenth. Now it was proposed it should be one-twenty- 
 seventh according to the Government statement; whereas it would 
 be actually only one-fortieth. The difference would be between 
 one and two millions sterling, which would have to come out of 
 the British taxpayer's pocket. While the British people were 
 required to pay 355. per head of the population towards Imperial 
 expenses, the Irish, who received the same benefits, were to be 
 let off with 6s. 6d. per head of population. 
 
 It was urged by the Government that the Irish were a poor 
 people, and could not afford more. 
 
 The reply to this was that the poor people of England 
 and Scotland also paid taxes, and that it was enough for them 
 to pay their share and not that of other people (the Irish). 
 
 Mr. Morley's motion itself was a formal one, and there was 
 no division on it, but it was necessary to discuss the financial 
 propositions it contained in order to bring out clearly and 
 exactly what the Government proposals were. After three hours' 
 discussion on this financial resolution, the consideration of the 
 third " compartment " of the Home Rule Bill was postponed till 
 Monday. 
 
 MONDAY, JULY 17th FORTY-FIRST DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 As Friday's sitting was taken up by the discussion of Mr. 
 Morley's financial resolution and other matters, the consideration 
 of the clauses of the Home Rule Bill in the third " compart- 
 ment " began to-day. 
 
 This "compartment" contains, as already stated, 14 clauses 
 (27 to 40, both inclusive). Under the " gagging" resolution car- 
 ried by the Government, each " compartment " was to be dis- 
 cussed for five sittings and then closured, no further discussion 
 being allowed. There remained, therefore, only to-day, Tues- 
 day, Wednesday, and until 10 o'clock on Thursday for the 
 debate on the fourteen clauses contained in this the third com- 
 partment. As these clauses contained provisions affecting the 
 judges, civil servants, officers and men of the constabulary, the 
 land, and other controversial matters of great importance, many 
 of them being equal to as many separate Bills (demanding weeks 
 fairly to discuss each one of them) it was evident that the Govern- 
 ment were determined to force their Home Rule Bill through 
 without a fair discussion on any of the clauses, and as regards a 
 large number of important provisions without any discussion at 
 all. 
 
 Clause 27. 
 
 This clause deals with the position and rights of the superior 
 judges, of the co.unty court judges, of the land commissioners, 
 and of all existing officers serving in Ireland in the permanent
 
 84 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 civil service. These officials are now under the Imperial Govern- 
 ment, and they have all been more or less threatened by the Irish 
 Nationalists with punishment if they, the Irish Nationalists, 
 should ever get Home Rule. As many of them have, by admin- 
 istering the law and doing their duty, made themselves obnoxious 
 to the Nationalists, who are, under the Bill, at the end of six 
 years to become their masters, it was felt by the Unionists that 
 they had a moral and legal claim to be protected. 
 
 Mr. Seton-Karr (St. Helens) then moved two amendments to 
 make the -protection of certain officials more definite, one of 
 which was withdrawn and the other defeated by a majority of 
 forty -five. 
 
 Clause 27 was then added to the Bill without a division. 
 Clause 28. 
 
 Mr. Morley made a statement ex-plaining the proposals of 
 the Government for dealing with all the civil servants of the 
 Crown. The total number of persons affected in this service 
 would be 1,201. The statement in question occupied the re- 
 mainder of the sitting and the House adjourned. 
 
 TUESDAY, JULY 18th FORTY-SECOND DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause 28. Continued.} 
 
 Mr. T. W. Russell moved an amendment to include the prin- 
 cipal teachers of National schools in Ireland so that they mighf 
 have the same -protection as the Government claimed to give to 
 civil servants. 
 
 He urged that the teachers in the Model schools in Ireland 
 were included, and therefore the principal teachers in the National 
 schools ought to be in the same position. The Government 
 opposed the amendment, which was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about \ hour 
 
 Government majority 71 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 48 
 
 Mr. Balfour then moved an amendment to the effect that no 
 Irish civil servant should be dismissed by the Irish Government 
 without having the offer of being transferred to the British civil 
 service. 
 
 It was pointed out that as these civil servants had been' 
 engaged by the Imperial Government, that Government were 
 under the obligation to see that they were not thrown out on 
 the world. Mr. Balfour was rudely interrupted in his speech,. 
 and further insults were offered to Mr. Milman, the Clerk at 
 the table. Mr. Balfour pointed out the threats that had been 
 made by Irish Nationalists as to how they would clear out these 
 civil servants and officials when they had the power, and that
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 85 
 
 these declarations could not be ignored. It was likely that the 
 officials would be subject to tyranny, and their lives be made a 
 burden to them. It was admitted by all that these men had 
 done their duty, and it was contended that they ought not to 
 be abandoned and cast adrift in the prime of life, with a small 
 pittance as a pension which, with their families and responsibili- 
 ties, would even mean ruin. 
 
 The Government were effusive in the praises of the civil 
 servants, but could only fall back on the oft-repeated answer 
 that the Irish Government would do nothing wrong ! 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2$ hours 
 
 Government majority 42 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 19 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JULY 19th FORTY-THIRD DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (Clause 28. Continued.} 
 
 The Irish Nationalist members exhibited the utmost tenacity 
 in securing every sixpence of money possible to the Irish Govern- 
 ment at the expense of the British people. After a protest from 
 the Unionist party as to the necessity for safeguards for the 
 rights of the civil servants, and against the injustice inflicted 
 on them, Clause 28 was added to the Bill without a division. 
 
 Clause 29. 
 
 This clause deals with the machinery and methods for carry- 
 ing out the arrangements made with regard to the civil service, 
 and was added to the Bill without a division, and the House 
 adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, JULY 20th. FORTY-FOURTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 Clause 30. 
 
 This clause provides that the Royal Irish Constabulary and 
 the Dublin Metropolitan Police shall be gradually reduced and 
 ultimately cease to exist when and as local police forces are from, 
 time to time established in Ireland under Irish control. 
 
 Mr. T. H. Bplton (St. Pancras) moved an amendment with 
 the object of giving the Lord Liezitenant a discretionary power 
 to retain the Irish Constabulary beyond the six years named in 
 the Bill, should events -make this course necessary.
 
 86 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 The amendment was opposed by the Irish and by the Govern- 
 ment, and was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about if hours 
 
 Government majority 32 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 9 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25 
 
 Mr. Sexton moved an amendment, demanding the right not 
 only of having a central -police force, but of having a force 
 drilled and armed. 
 
 Mr. T. W. Russell pointed out that this demand of the Irish 
 Nationalists foretold the state of things which would exist under 
 Home Rule. The Irish Nationalists knew, he said, perfectly 
 well that if ever this Bill became law the Ulster people would 
 not submit to it, and their (the Nationalists') object was to have 
 a central force to enable them to coerce the people of Belfast 
 and Londonderry. 
 
 The Unionist party joined the Government in opposing Mr. 
 Sexton's amendment, which was defeated by a majority of 127. 
 
 Mr. John Morley then moved an amendment, which had been 
 promised by the Government at a previous period in the debate. 
 This amendment was to the effect that no force organised and 
 armed as the present -police force or in any other manner than 
 that of a civil -police should be created by the Irish Parliament. 
 
 Mr. Sexton opposed this, declaring that if men in Ireland 
 rose in arms against the Irish Government they should have the 
 right to use an armed force against them. 
 
 It was pointed out, however, that the local police would 
 have the military to assist them in case of need in the same 
 manner as local authorities in other parts of the kingdom. The 
 debate on this amendment was proceeding, and Mr. Bartley was 
 speaking, when 10 o'clock, the time for the closure of this com- 
 partment arrived. 
 
 The Chairman proceeded forthwith to put the question. 
 
 This proceeding was hailed with shouts of " Gag " and 
 " Closure " amid a scene of great excitement. 
 
 An amendment by Mr. Sexton was negatived without a 
 division. 
 
 Mr. Morley's amendment was carried, with the assistance 
 of the Unionist members, by a large majority. It is noteworthy 
 that forty-nine Nationalist members voted in favour of having 
 this central force. It would be difficult under the Bill to find 
 anything to prevent them having such a force when once they 
 got an Irish Parliament and Executive. 
 
 The motion, " That Clause 30 be added to the Bill" was 
 then put and carried. 
 
 Government majority 26 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 3 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 87 
 
 The announcement of this small majority was received with 
 loud Opposition cheers. 
 
 It was then moved, " That Clause 31 be added to the Bill." 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 24 
 
 Clause 32. 
 
 This clause provides for the extension to each of the two 
 Houses of the Irish Legislature the -present laws relating to elec- 
 tions, but enables those laws to be altered by the Irish Parlia- 
 ment. 
 
 This clause was added to the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 24 
 
 Clause 33. 
 
 This clause contains supplementary provisions as to the 
 powers of the Irish Legislature. 
 
 The clause was added to the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 22 
 
 Clause 34.. 
 
 This clause was added to the Bill without discussion and 
 without a division. 
 
 Clause 35. 
 
 This clause, which placed some temporary restrictions of 
 powers on the Irish Legislature and Executive, was opposed by 
 the Irish and a certain number of extreme Gladstonians. 
 
 The clause was added to the Bill by a large majority. 
 
 Clause 36. 
 
 Clause 36 contains certain temporary provisions for setting 
 up the Irish Legislature and Government and for otherwise bring- 
 ing the Bill into operation. 
 
 This clause was added to the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25
 
 88 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Clause 37 . 
 Clause 37 was added to the Bill without a division. 
 
 Clause 38. 
 
 Clause 38 dealt with the date on which the Home Rule Bill 
 was to come into force. 
 
 This was added to the Bill. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 24 
 
 The last clause in the " compartment " was the title of the 
 Bill. It was passed without a division. 
 
 FRIDAY, JULY 21st. FORTY-FIFTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 The debate on the fourth " compartment " of the Bill began 
 to-day. This compartment included the -preamble of the Bill, 
 all the schedules, the -post-poned clauses, all the new Govern- 
 ment clauses; and the whole " compartment " was to be closured 
 by the " gagging " resolution at 10 o'clock on Thursday, the 2/th. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone moved the second reading of the new clause 
 dealing with the financial arrangements between Great Britain 
 and Ireland. This was the third financial scheme brought for- 
 ward by the Government, the first two having broken down 
 through their unworkable character. The new scheme provided 
 that one-third of the general revenue of Ireland should be paid 
 as the Irish contribution to the expenses of the Imperial Govern- 
 ment, the remaining two-thirds being retained by the Irish Govern- 
 ment. The collection and management of the Irish revenue were 
 to remain in the hands of the Imperial Government. This arrange- 
 ment was to last for six years, after which time all matters relat- 
 ing to the collection and management of Irish taxation, except 
 the customs and excise duties, were to be handed over to the 
 Irish Legislature, and the Irish contribution to Imperial expenses 
 was then to be revised. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain subjected the scheme to a very severe criti- 
 cism, pointing out that if Ireland paid according to her taxable 
 capacity, that is, according to her wealth, the sum paid towards 
 the Imperial expenses should be one-fourteenth of the whole 
 amount. Under the new scheme, reckoning a sum of five hun- 
 dred thousand pounds to be given as a free gift, the amount 
 that Ireland would have to pay would only be one-thirtieth. 
 Besides this, the whole of the cost of collecting the Irish revenue 
 was to be paid by the British Government ; so that the actual sum 
 which Ireland would be called upon to pay was only one-fortieth. 
 The Government were asked why, if Ireland was to have an
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 89 
 
 independent Legislature, the British taxpayer was to be called 
 upon to supply money for that purpose. This financial arrange- 
 ment, it was urged, in connection with the retaining of eighty 
 Irish members in the British Parliament, would place our whole 
 system of taxation at the mercy of the Irish people. Ireland 
 would have the same advantages of the Imperial expenditure 
 upon the Army, Navy, etc., as the Scotch and English; but, 
 under the Government proposals, while the British people would, 
 as already stated, have to pay thirty-five shillings per head for 
 Imperial expenses, the Irish would only have to pay six shillings 
 and sixpence per head. 
 
 Mr. Fowler (Wolverhampton) defended the scheme, but he 
 had to make up an array of figures which could not be relied on; 
 to admit that the whole expenses of collecting the Irish revenue 
 would fall on the British Government; and that the half mil- 
 lion per annum referred to was a " distinct bonus " to be given to 
 the Irish Government. He said, however, that the English people 
 would not reject Home Rule " on a miserable pounds, shillings, 
 and -pence objection." 
 
 MONDAY, JULY 24th FORTY-SIXTH DAY IN 
 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 The discussion on the second reading of the new financial 
 clause was continued. 
 
 The scheme contained therein was still further criticised. 
 From the speeches made by Nationalist members, it was shown 
 that even these liberal terms would be no settlement, but that 
 further concessions were, and would be, demanded. 
 
 Mr. Redmond (Waterford) boldly requested that the third 
 of the Irish revenue demanded to be paid towards Imperial ex- 
 penses should be reduced to one-fourth. 
 
 The debate was continued till midnight, when the second 
 reading of the financial clause was put and carried. 
 
 The discussion lasted about n hours 
 
 Government majority 35 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 12 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 24 
 
 TUESDAY, JULY 25th FORTY-SEVENTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (The consideration of the financial clause was continued.} 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain moved an amendment to do away with 
 the transitional -period of six years altogether. His object was 
 to secure a settlement of some sort. It was pointed out that 
 the object of the Government was plain. The Irish Nationalist 
 members had made far larger demands, which they were deter-
 
 90 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 mined to have. The Government, however, dared not yield to 
 these demands all at once, as that would be too much for their 
 supporters to accept. The present arrangement was, therefore, 
 made for six years, in order to hoodwink the British people, but 
 at the end of six years the Irish knew that they would have 
 everything their own way. Mr. Chamberlain further criticised 
 these financial proposals, and showed that they meant a com- 
 plete surrender, at the end of six years, of all Irish demands. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone replied in an angry manner, giving no answer 
 to the arguments, but indulging in strong personal remarks, and 
 showing great annoyance at the scheme being thus exposed. 
 
 The debate was continued till midnight, when the House 
 adjourned. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, JULY 26th FORTY-EIGHTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 (The discussion on Mr. Chamberlain's amendment was continued.} 
 
 It was pointed out that the Government had urged, as one 
 of the advantages of Home Rule, that it would settle the Irish 
 question, but it was now seen that it was all transitional, and that 
 six years hence they were to go through the whole thing again. 
 The Irish Nationalist members, instead of accepting the Bill as 
 a boon, had told them frankly that it was not accepted as a final 
 settlement, but only for what it was worth. 
 
 Mr. Balfour and Sir John Lubbock urged the Government 
 in vain to reply to the arguments made in favour of the amend- 
 ment. 
 
 The amendment was defeated by a majority of sixty. 
 
 Sir John Lubbock then moved to omit sub-sections two, three, 
 four, and five. These sub-sections introduced confusion in the 
 financial arrangements, and he quoted figures and gave illustra- 
 tions to show that the plans in these sub-sections were unpractical 
 and unworkable, and grievously unfair to the English and Scotch 
 taxpayers. The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2j hours 
 
 Government majority 47 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 24 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 8 
 
 THURSDAY, JULY 27th FORTY-NINTH DAY IN 
 COMMITTEE. 
 
 {The discussion on the financial clause continued.} 
 
 Mr. Clancy (Dublin Co., N.) moved an amendment to 
 guarantee to the Irish Government a sur-plus of five hundred 
 thousand -pounds each year. The object of this amendment was
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 91 
 
 to secure that no matter what the Irish Chancellor of the 
 Exchequer should spend, and no matter what the Irish revenue 
 might be, there should always be a surplus of half a million 
 secured to the Irish Government by the Imperial Parliament, 
 which surplus was to come out of the British taxpayers' pockets. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain pointed out the changes which had been 
 made in the Bill since its introduction, and that every change 
 had been supported by the Gladstonians. The question of the 
 retention of Irish members had been altered in a way directly 
 opposite to the pledges given to the constituencies. The Bill had 
 been changed in most of its vital features, and every change had 
 been supported slavishly by the followers of the Government. 
 The Prime Minister, he said, 
 
 " Calls ' black,' and they say, ' It is good ' ; the Prime Minister 
 calls ' white,' and they say, ' It is better.' It is always the 
 voice of a god. Never since the time of Herod has there been 
 such slavish adulation." 
 
 He was here interrupted by the Irish members by loud and 
 insulting cries, and not a word was heard above the din which 
 prevailed. It being 10 o'clock, the hour for applying the " gag- 
 ging resolution," the Chairman arose to put the question. A 
 scene of uproar now began such as was probably never seen in 
 the House of Commons before. Loud cries of " Order," " Gag," 
 " Shame," " Judas," " Clear the House," and " Name," were heard. 
 The Chairman found it impossible to keep order or to make him- 
 self heard. 
 
 Mr. Logan (Harborough) crossed over and sat on the front 
 Opposition bench. An attempt was made by Mr. Fisher to eject 
 him from this position. Irish Nationalist members rushed in a 
 body to the Unionist benches. Members were struggling with 
 one another and blows were struck. Colonel Saunderson was 
 struck on the head and a free fight went on. The Prime Minister 
 was looking on at the scene, evidently pained with what 
 he saw. Opposite to him was Sir Ashmead Bartlett who, under 
 great excitement, shouted to the Prime Minister, " This is your 
 doing." No division took place, and the doors were thrown 
 open. The Speaker was sent for, and he returned to the House 
 and took the chair. An account of the disgraceful scene was 
 laid before him by Mr. Gladstone, Mr. Mellor, and Mr. Balfour. 
 It was shown that the cause of the row was the interruptions 
 and the insults with which Mr. Chamberlain was assailed. 
 
 Mr. Clancy's amendment was ultimately negatived without 
 a division. 
 
 A new financial clause was then moved and carried. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 21 
 
 Majority against the Government after de- 
 ducting the 23 members by which Ire- 
 land is over-represented 2 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 30 
 
 The announcement of this small majority was received with 
 loud and prolonged Unionist cheers.
 
 92 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 A new Government clause was then moved (to follow Clause 
 9) dealing with the Irish consolidated fund and Irish revenues. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 33 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 10 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 26 
 
 A new clause was then moved (after Clause 16) dealing with 
 local taxation and other matters; and also another new clause 
 (after Clause 19) dealing with the Irish Post Office revenue and 
 expenditure, and a definition clause (after Clause 38). These 
 were added to the Bill without any division. 
 
 The clauses which had been postponed during the debate were 
 then taken. 
 
 Clause 15, dealing with the Irish Church fund, was carried. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 33 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 10 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25 
 
 Clause 16, which relates to local loans, was carried. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 33 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 10 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25 
 
 The first schedule of the Bill was then moved. This schedule 
 names and defines the forty-eight constituencies which are to elect 
 members to the Irish Upper House. 
 
 The schedule was carried. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 33 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented 10 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 25 
 
 The second schedule of the Bill was then moved. This 
 schedule fixes the number of members in the Irish House of Com- 
 mons, and names the constituencies which are to return thos'e 
 members. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 17 
 
 Majority against the Government after de- 
 ducting the 23 members by which Ire- 
 land is over-represented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 29 
 
 The smallness of the majority against this important 
 schedule, which was passed without discussion, was received with 
 loud Unionist cheers.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 93 
 
 The third schedule, dealing with Imperial liabilities and ex- 
 penditure, was added to the Bill without a division. 
 
 The fourth and sixth schedules, dealing with the Post 
 Office and the Royal Irish Constabulary, were, on the motion of 
 the Government, struck out of the Bill. 
 
 The seventh schedule was then moved. This schedule pro- 
 vides for the regulations to be adopted by both Houses of the 
 Irish Parliament. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 31 
 
 Government majority after deducting th'e 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 8 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 28 
 
 A new schedule in the place of schedule 6 was then moved. 
 This schedule referred to the establishment of police forces, and 
 providing for the discontinuance of the Royal Irish Constabulary 
 and the. Dublin police. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 30 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 7 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 27 
 
 The preamble of the Bill (that is to say, the introduction} 
 was then moved. 
 
 Time of discussion None 
 
 Government majority 30 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 7 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 27 
 
 This was the last division, and the Bill was thus passed 
 through Committee. 
 
 The scenes which had marked this last night of discussion 
 were thoroughly disgraceful to the House of Commons. These 
 scenes were the result of much which had gone before. The 
 action of the Government in putting down free speech, and 
 gagging the House of Commons in order to force the measure 
 through had led to great irritation. The conduct of the Irish 
 Nationalist Party during the debate had been on many occasions 
 rude and insulting. The Unionists, who regarded the Home 
 Rule measure as a great blow against the unity of the Empire, 
 had done their best to reveal its rottenness. Their arguments 
 had been met, sometimes by silence on the part of the Govern- 
 ment, and sometimes by evasion. Vital parts of the Bill had 
 been changed suddenly, and discussion had been prevented by the 
 closure. Clause after clause had been forced upon the House 
 without any debate. The dignity of the House of Commons 
 had -been lowered by the action of the Government and the 
 tyranny of Irish members. The rude and rowdy interruptions
 
 94 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 and insults to Mr. Chamberlain, while he was speaking, brought 
 matters to a climax, and were the immediately exciting cause of 
 the disgraceful proceedings described. 
 
 The whole responsibility for these proceedings rested with 
 the Government. 
 
 A letter to the Times, signed " Observer," states : 
 
 " Since the general election of 1892, the irregularity and dis- 
 order of the Irish members have greatly increased. . . . The 
 Prime Minister, being in alliance with the Nationalist members, 
 has never checked their disorder. By his conduct he has en- 
 couraged it. ... On Tuesday last a studied speech of bitter 
 insult was composed and delivered by the Prime Minister 
 against Mr. Chamberlain. As bitter as his words were the tone 
 and gesture employed. Reprisal came last night a reprisal 
 fully justified by the injury inflicted. . . . But another cause 
 of the outbreak was at work. The Prime Minister had arbi- 
 trarily brought free discussion to an end. Gagged men are apt 
 to struggle at any rate to be angry. ... It was not until 
 our great free Parliament became fettered and silenced that it 
 ever resorted to physical violence." 
 
 Another letter in the Times of August ist stated that the 
 Home Rule Bill, when reprinted after it had passed through the 
 Committee stage, 
 
 " Contained 1495 lines. Of these 331 only had been discussed; 
 the remaining 1164 had been 'gagged' and passed without any 
 discussion at all. Of the 331 lines which had been discussed, 
 155 had been amended." 
 
 ****** 
 
 We have now finished our observations on the Committee 
 Stage of the Home Rule Bill. For the information of our 
 readers, we may say that a Bill in the House of Commons has to 
 pass through five stages: (i) The first is called the "First 
 Reading " (or introduction). This is usually a mere formal stage. 
 After the first reading or introduction a Bill is at once printed 
 and circulated. (2) The second stage is called the "Second Read- 
 ing." The general scope, objects, and procedure of the Bill are 
 debated by its promoters, and by its opponents. (3) The next 
 is the " Committee " Stage. This is the most important stage of 
 all. The Bill is discussed clause by clause, and amendments are 
 proposed, discussed, and divided upon. Each speaker, more- 
 over, can speak more than once, and the proceedings are often of 
 a conversational character. (4) After the Committee Stage is 
 finished, the Bill is then what is called " Reported " to the House, 
 with all amendments which have been made to the various clauses. 
 This is a very important stage, for very often as, for instance, 
 in the case of the Home Rule Bill a measure may come out of 
 the Committee Stage so altered as to be, in point of fact, quite 
 another measure. (5) Then comes the final stage, or what is 
 called the " Third Reading." This takes the form of a debate 
 on the whole Bill as amended up to that point. There are rarely 
 any amendments made on the Third Reading, and the division 
 upon the Third Reading takes the form of being either for or 
 against the Bill.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 95 
 
 REPORT STAGE. 
 
 MONDAY, AUGUST 7th FIRST DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Parker Smith (Partick) moved a new clause for the 
 appointment of Boundary Commissioners in order to secure that 
 the constituencies which elected members to the Irish Parliament 
 should be more equal as regards -population. 
 
 According to the arrangement in the schedule, or list of con- 
 stituencies proposed by the Bill, great injustice was done to the 
 minority in Ireland. The representation of the south of Ireland 
 was extravagant, while that of the northern parts of Ireland was 
 too small. As an example of the inequalities, it was shown that, 
 at present, the whole county of Down had four representatives. 
 The Government proposed in the schedule that it should in future 
 have only three, but the small borough of Newry, with less than 
 2,000 electors, would return one member, while the rest of the 
 county, with nearly 40,000 electors, would only have two mem- 
 bers. The northern Unionist county of Armagh had twice the 
 number of electors as the Nationalist county of Meath, but 
 had only the same number of representatives. The northern 
 Unionist county of Down, with 38,000 electors, had only the same 
 number of representatives as Nationalist Kerry with 21,000 
 electors. The Gladstonian members themselves spoke against 
 these inequalities, but the Government declined to give way. 
 
 The clause was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 3i hours 
 
 Government majority 44 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented 21 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 3 
 
 Mr. Parker Smith (Partick) moved a new clause abolishing 
 the assistance now given to illiterates for recording their votes. 
 
 At present, if a man declared that he could not read or write 
 he applied, under the Ballot Act of 1872, to someone who was, 
 it turned out, generally the priest to have his paper marked for 
 him. It was shown that this power was abused, and that the man 
 really voted for anyone whom the priest chose. The disgraceful 
 revelations of the Meath elections were referred to. The evidence 
 at the Meath election petition showed that in every booth the elec- 
 tioneering agent for one of the candidates was a Catholic priest. 
 
 Mr. T. W. Russell declared that this illiteracy was merely 
 an engine of the Roman Catholic priesthood. He had seen it 
 with his own eyes. If a voter showed any hesitation, he was 
 ordered to declare himself illiterate, so that the priests in the 
 polling-booth might see how he voted. 
 
 The Government resisted the clause, and it was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 3 hours 
 
 Government majority 43 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 20 
 
 British vote equal
 
 96 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 TUESDAY, AUGUST 8th SECOND DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Macartney (South Antrim) moved a new clause as a 
 substitute for Clause g of the Bill. The new clause provided that 
 after the Irish peo-ple had a Parliament of their own they should 
 cease to return members to the British Parliament. 
 
 This gave rise to an important debate, as it raised the whole 
 question of the injustice which would be done to the British people 
 by having British affairs controlled and governed by Irish 
 members. 
 
 The discussion, which began at 8.30, was continued till mid- 
 night, when the House arose. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 9th THIRD DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 The discussion on Mr. Macartney's new clause, for the ex- 
 clusion of Irish members from the British Parliament, was 
 resumed. 
 
 The debate was perhaps the most embarrassing which the 
 Government had to meet. They found it impossible to find any 
 argument to maintain their position. It was pointed out that, 
 under the Bill as introduced, the Irish members were to vote on 
 the " in-and-out " plan that is, they were to vote only on Im- 
 perial questions, and not on British questions. Suddenly (at a 
 few hours' notice) the Government changed this plan into one for 
 retaining the eighty Irish members to vote on every question. It 
 was declared that this intended change was kept quiet by evasion 
 and trickery, and carried by the coercion of the " gag." 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain referred to Sir William Harcourt, who, in 
 1885, commenting upon the action of the Irish members in the 
 British Parliament, said: 
 
 " If the English Parliament is not to become a helpless tool 
 in the hands of this party (the Irish party) you must give an 
 overwhelming majority to the only party which has the courage 
 and the honesty to face them." 
 
 " This is the position now," added Mr. Chamberlain. " We 
 are face to face with the party of eighty Irish members, and we 
 are prepared to give an overwhelming majority to the party that 
 will dare to face them. Can it be that the courage and honesty 
 are wanting? " 
 
 The Government had practically no answer to give to all or 
 any of these arguments, and to the strong speeches delivered by 
 the Unionist members. 
 
 The proposed new clause was, therefore, defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 8$ hours 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented ii 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 13
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 97 
 
 THURSDAY, AUGUST 10th FOURTH DAY OF THE 
 11 REPORT STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Mildmay (Totnes Division of Devon) moved a new 
 clause with the object of -protecting all subjects of the Queen in 
 Ireland in doing any act which they had a legal right to do, or in 
 abstaining from doing any act which they had a legal right 
 to abstain from doing; and that the executive government in 
 Ireland should protect those subjects in the exercise of those 
 liberties, and, failing such -protection being given, -persons injured 
 might recover damages in respect of such injuries. 
 
 The Government resisted the clause, declaring that it was 
 vague and unnecessary. 
 
 It was shown, however, that the Irish Nationalist Party had 
 practically approved of the practice of boycotting; that they had 
 made the lives a burden to those who had dared to resist the will 
 of the Land League, and had compelled them to do things against 
 their will, under the pain of ruin and outrage; and that the pro- 
 tection demanded by the clause was absolutely necessary to pro- 
 tect loyal minorities in the exercise of their rights of common 
 citizenship. The Gladstonians were reminded of the pledges they 
 had given over and over again that these minorities should be 
 protected in their rights. 
 
 The clause was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 3$ hours 
 
 Government majority > 40 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 17 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 13 
 
 FRIDAY, AUGUST 11th FIFTH DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 Lord Wolmer (Edinburgh, W.) moved an amendment em- 
 powering the Privy Council to decide whether any Bill dealt with 
 by the Irish Parliament was beyond the powers of that Parlia- 
 ment to deal with. 
 
 The clause was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 45 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 22 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 5 
 
 MONDAY, AUGUST 14th SIXTH DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 Major Darwin (Lichfield) moved a new clause to -protect 
 soldiers stationed in Ireland in connection with any service which 
 they might be called u-pon to give in any civil disturbance, and 
 where the military laivs and discipline might prevent them from 
 giving such assistance.
 
 93 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 It was contended that after the passing of this Bill the posi- 
 tion of the soldier in Ireland would be an intolerable one. He 
 would be compelled to obey the military laws as laid down by 
 the Imperial Parliament which he was bound to obey or to 
 quit the service; and, at the same time, he would be made liable 
 to assist in carrying out the laws of the Irish Parliament, over 
 which the Imperial Parliament had no control. He would have, 
 in fact, two masters, and be subject to punishment unless he 
 obeyed both, which was impossible. 
 
 The clause was, however, opposed by the Government, and 
 defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted 2$ hours 
 
 Government majority 29 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 6 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 14 
 
 TUESDAY, AUGUST 15th SEVENTH DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Heneage (Grimsby) moved an amendment to omit the 
 preamble or introduction of the Bill. He did so on the ground 
 that the preamble had never been discussed in consequence of the 
 gagging resolution; that since the introduction of the Bill the 
 measure had been changed in all its vital points; that there was 
 practically now a new Bill ; and that the preamble, therefore, in 
 no way represented the character of the Bill. 
 
 The Government resisted the motion, which was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i hour 
 
 Government majority 45 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 22 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 4 
 
 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 16th EIGHTH DAY OF THE 
 " REPORT STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Morley, the Chief Secretary, moved to insert after sub- 
 section 3 in Clause 2 the following further restriction: "(4) 
 Authorising either the carrying or using of arms for military pur- 
 poses, or the formation of associations for drill or practice in the 
 use of arms for military purposes." 
 
 The object of this new sub-section was for the purposes of 
 withdrawing from the Irish Legislature the power of forming 
 associations for drill or practice in the use of arms for military 
 purposes. The sub-section was brought up in accordance with a 
 pledge given during the debate in Committee on June 2nd. The 
 restriction in the sub-section only refers to military purposes, but 
 it does not touch associations or clubs which do not come under 
 that designation. The Unionist party, however, accepted these 
 words as being the best they could get.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 99 
 
 Sir John Gorst (Cambridge University) moved an amend- 
 ment to -prevent the Irish Legislature from -passing laws affect- 
 ing the hours and conditions of labour in factories, workshops, 
 and mines. 
 
 At present such legislation was under the control of the Im- 
 perial Parliament, and should continue under such control. There 
 was a splendid system of factory legislation enforced by inspec- 
 tors throughout the United Kingdom. It was contended that 
 this uniformity should continue, otherwise there might be dif- 
 ferent regulations in Ireland from those in England. This was a 
 labour question. 
 
 It was pointed out that the trades unionists of Ireland were 
 few in number, and that they were only powerful through their 
 alliance with the trades unionists of England and Scotland. 
 Under the Bill they would be a small body, with comparatively 
 little power. 
 
 The so-called labour members in the House of Commons 
 were challenged to have the courage to su-pport the amendment 
 instead of to oppose it, and, in the latter case, abandon their 
 fellow trades unionists in Ireland. It was urged that the work- 
 ing classes in Great Britain would scarcely believe the monstrous 
 character of the Government propositions. Under the Bill, there 
 would be eighty Irish members in the Imperial Parliament who 
 would determine the kind of factory legislation to be adopted in 
 Great Britain. They could deal with child labour and women 
 labour, the hours of work in mines and factories, and all other 
 conditions of labour in Great Britain, which would not apply to 
 Ireland, and these same members, after having SETTLED these 
 matters for the English and Scotch, would be able to make in the 
 Irish Parliament what regulations they chose as affecting Ireland. 
 They might, for instance, vote for or against an eight-hours day 
 in Great Britain, and allow ten hours in Ireland. They might 
 vote for prohibiting or regulating women labour and child labour 
 in Great Britain, and, at the same time, make what regulation 
 they chose with regard to such labour in Ireland. It was pointed 
 out that the result would be an unfair and damaging competition 
 between the two countries. 
 
 The Government resisted the amendment, which was accord 
 ingly defeated, and it was worthy of notice that those who figure 
 on platforms as the friends of trades unionists were restrained by 
 party considerations from voting for the amendment in favour of 
 the working classes. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2 hours 
 
 Government majority 45 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 22 
 
 Mr. Vicary Gibbs (Hertfordshire) moved an amendment to 
 Clause 3, to prevent the Irish Legislature from dealing with coin- 
 age and currency.
 
 100 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 As the Bill stood, the Irish Government would have power 
 to issue what is called a paper currency without any security to the 
 holder of it. 
 
 The debate was continued until 5.30, when it stood 
 adjourned. 
 
 THURSDAY, AUGUST 17th NINTH DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 (The debate on Mr. Vicar y Gibbs* amendment was continued.} 
 
 It was pointed out that to give the Irish Government power 
 to issue paper money would be dangerous to trade and to indi- 
 viduals. It was a power that the Imperial Government did not 
 possess, and which should not be given to the Irish Government. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone opposed the amendment, and it was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i| hours 
 
 Government majority 42 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented IQ 
 
 Mr. Vicary Gibbs moved an amendment to Clause 3, to 
 prevent the Irish Legislature from legislating on the subject of 
 bills of exchange. 
 
 This was a matter of great importance to the whole of the 
 trading community. 
 
 Mr. Jacks (Gladstonian member for Stirlingshire) spoke 
 strongly in favour of the amendment, and pointed out the con- 
 fusion and difficulty which would be produced in trade and com- 
 merce if it were not adopted. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone, however, opposed the amendment, and repre- 
 sented the opposition to it as another attack on the proposed Irish 
 Government. 
 
 The amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about i$ hours 
 
 Government majority 34 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re 
 presented n 
 
 Mr. Macartney (South Antrim) moved an amendment for the 
 purpose of removing the' questions of marriage and divorce from 
 the subjects allowed to be dealt with by the Irish Legislature. 
 
 The question had been previously debated in Committee, but 
 the anxiety and alarm which existed among the Protestant popu- 
 lation of Ireland through the action of the Government in resist- 
 ing the amendment were still very great. The strong arguments 
 used in Committee were repeated, and earnest appeals were made 
 to protect the Presbyterian and other Protestant sects in their 
 present customs with regard to marriage and divorce, and not to 
 place these questions, which affect the domestic happiness of a 
 people to so large a degree, under a Roman Catholic and 
 Nationalist Parliament.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 101 
 
 The debate had proceeded only a short time, when it was 
 closured on the motion of Mr. Morley. 
 
 The discussion lasted about \\ hours 
 
 Government majority 49 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 26 
 
 Lord George Hamilton (Middlesex, Ealing) moved an 
 amendment to Clause 3 to prevent the Irish Legislature from 
 having the power to pass resolutions in connection with the Army 
 and Navy, and the defences of the country. 
 
 It was pointed out that in case of war, the Irish Parliament 
 might, under the Bill, pass resolutions of sympathy with our 
 opponents, and might do other acts by resolution which would 
 create grave difficulties in times of disputes or wars with foreign 
 countries. 
 
 The Government, however, opposed all concessions, and the 
 amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 2j hours 
 
 Government majority 30, 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented 16 
 
 FRIDAY, AUGUST 18th TENTH DAY OF THE " REPORT 
 
 STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Powell Williams (South Birmingham) moved an amend- 
 ment to prevent the Irish Parliament imposing any disability, or 
 conferring any advantage, on account of religious belief, or 
 raising any revenue for religious purposes, or for the benefit of 
 the holders of any religious office, as such, save as heretofore. 
 
 The Government accepted this amendment, which was all the 
 Unionists could get, although it left the whole powers mentioned 
 as heretofore that is, as already mentioned in the Bill un- 
 touched. It did not prevent the evils named in the debate in 
 Committee, but made it necessary to exercise more care in the 
 methods by which the powers referred to were exercised. For 
 instance, priests and nuns in Ireland might be managers of indus- 
 trial schools, reformatories, elementary schools, and other insti- 
 tutions, and the Irish Government voting money to these institu- 
 tions would have to vote it nominally for the support of educa- 
 tional teaching, and not for religious teaching, though the sec- 
 tarian character of the institutions would remain. 
 
 MONDAY, AUGUST 21st ELEVENTH DAY OF THE 
 11 REPORT STAGE." 
 
 ANOTHER " GAGGING " RESOLUTION. 
 
 This day's sitting was occupied with the discussion of another 
 gagging resolution brought forward by Mr. Gladstone, to the 
 effect that, at eleven o'clock on Friday, the "2^th, all discussion
 
 102 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 on the Re-port stage of the Bill should cease; and that any amend- 
 ments standing in the name of the Government should then be -put 
 to the vote without discussion. All the other amendments stand- 
 ing in the name of the Unionist party, whether good or bad, were 
 not to be discussed, and were not even to be put to the vote. 
 
 The discussion on this proposal was of an angry character. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain opposed the " gagging," and moved an 
 amendment against it. 
 
 He quoted Mr. Gladstone, who, speaking of the closure in 
 1 88 1, declared that it was never intended to be used against the 
 minority in the ordinary sense, but only intended to enable the 
 House, irrespective of party, to -put a stop to occasional obstinacy 
 of some -particular member. He pointed out that Mr. Gladstone 
 was then of opinion, that no majority was justified in dealing, 
 by means of the closure, with an ordinary minority. All these 
 opinions, Mr. Chamberlain showed, were now thrown to the 
 winds. We were to have legislation by the gag, instead of legis- 
 lation by discussion. The Prime Minister was acting as a 
 Dictator by desiring to impose his will on the people of Great 
 Britain, and this, too, over a measure which had never been before 
 the constituencies, and for which he had no mandate. The Bill 
 was being forced through Parliament by Irish votes votes -pur- 
 chased by a surrender of the best interests of Great Britain and 
 by a majority returned by priests, illiterates, and moonlighters. 
 Three-quarters of the Bill would be passed without consideration 
 or discussion of any kind. Questions deeply affecting Great 
 Britain were to be passed by means of the gag, and amendments 
 were not even allowed to be divided on, much less discussed. All 
 this was to punish them (the British people) for not having given 
 a majority to the Prime Minister. Mr. Chamberlain concluded 
 his speech by saying : 
 
 " We appeal to the country against this political dictatorship 
 by which the interests of Great Britain have been surrendered 
 and betrayed and against the tactics by which the House of 
 Commons has been insulted and degraded." 
 
 Mr. Balfour, in a brilliant speech, concluded the debate. He 
 showed that the liberty and honour of the House were flung aside ; 
 he challenged the Government to appeal to the people, whom they 
 were deceiving. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain's amendment was then put and defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about 7 hours 
 
 Government majority 38 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over- re- 
 presented 15 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 13 
 
 The " gagging " resolution was then passed without a 
 division.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 103 
 
 TUESDAY, AUGUST 22nd TWELFTH DAY OF THE 
 11 REPORT STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Parker Smith (Partick) moved an amendment to prevent 
 the Irish Parliament from suspending the writ of Habeas Corpus. 
 
 This question was raised in Committee, and was then resisted 
 by the Government. Mr. Parker Smith's present amendment was 
 a further attempt to induce the Government to give way. 
 
 Sir Henry James (Bury) stated that they (the Opposition) 
 did not wish to discuss the matter twice over, but that they keenly 
 felt the injustice which would be done unless a remedy were pro- 
 vided, and that it was their bounden duty to do all they could to 
 prevent the danger the amendment contemplated. It was now, 
 he said, avowedly proposed to allow the Irish Government a free 
 hand to suspend the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland. He con- 
 tended that this was an Imperial matter, and that it was one 
 which should be left in the hands of the Imperial Government to 
 deal with. 
 
 Mr. Barton (Mid. Armagh) as a representative of the Irish 
 minority, reminded the House that the debate in Committee was 
 closured before any Irish Loyalist member had spoken. He pro- 
 tested against the terribly coercive conditions of the Bill as it 
 stood. In the American States no such powers as those under 
 discussion existed ; and he asked, " Were the people of Ulster to 
 submit to a tyrannous Constitution which no American citizen 
 would accept?' 
 
 The Irish members opposed, the Government declined to give 
 way, and the amendment was defeated. 
 
 The discussion lasted about \ hour 
 
 Government majority 44 
 
 Government majority after deducting the 23 
 members by which Ireland is over-re- 
 presented 21 
 
 British majority against the Government ... 6 
 
 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23rd THIRTEENTH DAY OF THE 
 
 11 REPORT STAGE." 
 
 Lord Cranborne (Rochester) moved an amendment to Clause 
 5 setting forth that in all matters in Clause 3 on which the Irish 
 Legislature were not allowed to legislate, and with respect to all 
 restrictions on their legislation contained in Clause 4, the Lord 
 Lieutenant should act as representing Her Majesty, and not on 
 the advice of the Irish Government. 
 
 The object of this amendment was to secure that in these 
 Imperial matters in Ireland the Lord Lieutenant should have 
 powers over the Executive (police, sheriffs, etc.) in order to see that 
 they were carried out. It was held to be absolutely necessary that 
 the Lord Lieutenant should act as representing Her Majesty 
 and under the advice of the Imperial Government in all matters 
 which were excluded from the power of the Irish Legislature by 
 Clauses 3 and 4. 
 
 The amendment was under discussion at 5-3> when the de- 
 bate was adjourned.
 
 104 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 THURSDAY, AUGUST 24th FOURTEENTH DAY OF THE 
 
 " REPORT STAGE." 
 
 (The debate on Lord Cranborne's amendment was resumed.*} 
 
 It was urged that it was useless to reserve certain subjects 
 from the power of the Irish Parliament, unless the Lord Lieu- 
 tenant, as a representative of the Queen, acting under the advice 
 of the Imperial Government, had power to enforce these condi- 
 tions; and that unless the amendment was accepted, the Lord 
 Lieutenant would be a blind instrument in the hands of the Irish 
 Legislature. 
 
 Mr. Balfour gave, as an instance, that in sub-section 4 it was 
 provided that the Irish Parliament should pass no Act affecting 
 the conscience clause, but that it required no Act of Parliament to 
 do this. The Irish Educational Board could do it without legis- 
 lation. The Board might, with the consent of the Lord Lieu- 
 tenant, issue fresh rules, and so abolish the conscience clause in 
 every school in Ireland, This was one of the many injustices 
 which might easily be done, if the Lord Lieutenant in such mat- 
 ters was to act solely on the advice of the Irish Ministers. 
 
 Mr. Courtney supported the amendment. He asked the 
 Government why they should allow any doubt to exist on such an 
 important matter. Why not make it clear by accepting the 
 amendment ? 
 
 The amendment, however, was opposed by the Government, 
 and after a discussion of about three and a half hours' duration, 
 it was defeated by a majority of 54. 
 
 Sir Richard Temple (Kingston, Surrey) moved an amend- 
 ment -providing that the Lord Lieutenant should give or withhold 
 the Royal assent to bills in accordance with instructions given 
 by Her Majesty. 
 
 This amendment was another attempt to make the veto a real 
 safeguard to the minorities in Ireland. 
 
 It was shown that in Grattan's Parliament, which existed in 
 Ireland for eighteen years in the last century, every Act had to 
 be approved by the Sovereign acting under the advice of the 
 Imperial Ministry. It was shown that the eighty Irish members 
 in the Imperial Parliament would be practically exercising the 
 powers of the veto on Scotch and English legislation, while 
 English and Scotch members would have no control over Irish 
 legislation. 
 
 The Irish Nationalist members declared that they would 
 not submit to any such restriction. 
 
 Sir Henry James said that the question simply was whether 
 all powers of legislation were to be handed over to the Irish 
 Parliament without any check. 
 
 After about an hour's discussion, the amendment was de- 
 feated, by a majority of fifty
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 105 
 
 FRIDAY, AUGUST 25th FIFTEENTH DAY OF THE 
 
 " REPORT STAGE." 
 
 Mr. Gerald Balfour (Leeds) moved an amendment to enable 
 the Lord Lieutenant to refuse his assent to any -provisions or 
 legislation which might be joined on to Appropriation Bills. 
 
 This amendment raised a vital question, and caused a warm 
 discussion. 
 
 To show the importance of the matter, it is necessary to ex- 
 plain that an Appropriation Bill is a bill brought into Parliament 
 at the end of a session to apportion the money voted by Parlia- 
 ment to the different departments of the public service in which 
 that money is to be spent. If assent to these Appropriation Bills 
 were refused, the business of every department of Government 
 would be stopped. All the salaries of the officials all the work 
 of the country would be interfered with, and general confusion 
 in all the departments would be the result. To avoid this confu- 
 sion, the assent of the Queen is always given to Appropriation 
 Bills. In the Irish Parliament, however, the Lord Lieutenant, 
 acting under the advice of the Irish Government, would have to 
 assent to the Appropriation Bills placed before him. It was shown 
 that, under the Home Rule Bill, as it stood, the Irish Executive 
 could tack on any illegal or objectionable legislation to such Ap- 
 propriation Bills, and so could compel the Lord Lieutenant to give 
 his assent thereto as being part of the Appropriation Bill. 
 
 As one instance among many, the Irish Parliament might add 
 to an Appropriation Bill a provision suspending trial by jury in 
 Ulster, or some other oppressive measure affecting the rights of 
 the loyal and Protestant minorities in Ireland. Such oppressive 
 legislation would thus be smuggled through as part of an Appro- 
 priation Bill. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone, in an angry speech, refused the amendment. 
 
 Mr. Courtney (Bodmin) showed that without this amendment 
 the veto of the Lord Lieutenant, which had been so much relied 
 on, ivould be valueless; and that all the restrictions arrd limita- 
 tions imposed on the Irish Parliament might be evaded if the 
 latter were allowed to tack Bills, dealing with prohibited mat- 
 ters, on to Appropriation Bills. He said that the Government 
 were bound to reply to their arguments unless they were ready to 
 confess that they intended the Irish Legislature to be in no way 
 subordinate to the Imperial Parliament. Mr. Goschen also chal- 
 lenged a reply. He said the House and the country would now 
 knoiv that the bubble of the veto had been pricked, and that 
 every provision for the protection of the loyal and Protestant 
 minorities in Ireland was knocked on the head. 
 
 The Government felt that some reply was necessary, and Mr. 
 Bryce, therefore, made a lame speech, but the only answer he 
 could give was that the Lord Lieutenant could veto the Appro- 
 priation Bill a remedy the utterly impracticable character of 
 which created much laughter in the House. He made the dan- 
 gerous admission that if the Irish Parliament wished to do things
 
 106 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 beyond their legitimate power there were other ways besides this 
 in which they could do so a statement which was received with 
 ironical cheers, as it admitted (what the Unionists had been con- 
 tending for all along] that all the so-called safeguards were mere 
 shams. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain criticised Mr. Bryce's speech, and quoted a 
 statement of his made in Committee, on July the 6th, in which he 
 (Mr. Bryce) approved of power being given to the Lord Lieutenant 
 in the matter of Appropriation Bills, a power which the present 
 amendment sought to give, and which he (Mr. Bryce) was now 
 opposing. Mr. Chamberlain pointed out that Mr. Bryce, in his 
 speech, could only now say that it was useless to adopt the 
 amendment because the Irish Legislature might if they chose 
 evade all the safeguards for the loyalist minority provided in the 
 Bill that it was useless to deal with this particular point, inas- 
 much as there were lots of other ways in which the Irish 
 Parliament could elude the restrictions placed upon them. The 
 Government, however, were not allowed by the Irish Party to 
 make any concession and, therefore, after about two hours' 
 debate, Mr. Gerald Bal four's amendment was negatived without 
 a division. 
 
 Sir Thomas Lea (Londonderry) moved an amendment to 
 prevent the National Board of Education from altering the pre- 
 sent rules affecting education in Ireland without the consent of 
 the Lord Lieutenant, acting as representative of Her Majesty ; 
 that is to say, without the consent of the Imperial Government. 
 
 He pointed out that the present system of education was un- 
 denominational ; that nearly half the schools in Ireland were 
 mixed schools which Protestant and Roman Catholic children 
 attended; that in the southern parts of Ireland the number of 
 Protestant children was very small, and that it was necessary to 
 protect them from any alteration of the rules which at present 
 shielded them. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain dwelt on the importance of the amendment. 
 He urged that though (the hour for " gagging " the debate being 
 near) there was no time to discuss it, yet the division lists would 
 be important as showing which members were willing to place 
 the education of Ireland in the absolute power of a Parliament, 
 the majority of whose members would be of necessity elected 
 under the influence of the Roman Catholic priests. 
 
 Mr. Healy replied, in a rude speech, full of impertinent 
 references to the Unionist party. He dealt with matters outside 
 the question, in order to fill up the short time left before the gag- 
 ging resolution would take effect, and with the evident object of 
 preventing the Ulster members from speaking, and showing up 
 the gross injustice to the Protestant minority in Ireland, which, 
 in the matter of education, the Bill would inflict. 
 
 He was speaking at 1 1 o'clock, when, according to the " gag- 
 ging " resolution, the debate was to be brought to a close. 
 
 The Speaker then rose and put the amendment, which was 
 defeated by a majority of thirty-six.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 107 
 
 The new clauses and amendments prepared by the Govern- 
 ment were then proposed, and all were added to the Bill without 
 discussion. There were no divisions taken on these clauses and 
 amendments, with the exception of two. 
 
 The Report stage was thus concluded by means of the 
 " S a S" an d the Third Reading was fixed for Wednesday, the 
 3Oth of August. 
 
 THIRD READING. 
 
 WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 30th FIRST DAY OF THE THIRD 
 
 READING. 
 
 Mr. Gladstone to-day moved the third reading of the Bill. 
 He did not go into the merits of the Bill itself, but spoke mainly 
 of the time the measure had occupied in Parliament. He referred 
 to the opinions of foreign writers with regard to Ireland, and 
 especially quoted Count Cavour as being in favour of his Irish 
 policy. He referred at length to the legislatures in Norway and 
 Sweden and in other European countries in defence of his Home 
 Rule proposals for Ireland. 
 
 Mr. Courtney (Bodmin) moved the rejection of the Bill. He 
 combatted Mr. Gladstone's reference to continental countries; he 
 said that Norway and Sweden had nothing whatever to do with 
 the question before the House, and that Count Cavour in Italy, 
 in spite of great opposition, suppressed all the State Legislatures 
 which existed, and made a united Italy. He pointed out that 
 there was no national demand in Great Britain for Home Rule, 
 and that there was scarcely a meeting held in its favour. A Bill 
 of such importance had never been introduced into Parliament 
 before. It proposed to alter the constitution of the United 
 Kingdom. In other countries all alterations of the constitution 
 were made very difficult. He contended that the Bill being pre- 
 sented to the country for the first time, the Opposition were 
 bound to fully discuss it in order that the constituencies might 
 know what it meant. Important parts of it had been changed 
 since its introduction. The retention of the Irish members for 
 all ptirposes had been decided on only by the Government a few 
 hours before the closure was applied, and thus left it practically 
 undiscussed. 
 
 Mr. John Redmond (Waterford), as an Irish Nationalist, 
 made an important speech. He said that the long time which had 
 been spent upon the Committee of the Bill had been well spent, 
 and that although there had been trivial speeches made, yet he 
 thought, on the whole, it had been a discussion worthy of the 
 House, and had thrown much light upon a difficidt and compli- 
 cated problem. He plainly said, however, that, " as the Bill 
 now stood, no man in his senses could any longer regard it either 
 as a full, a final, or satisfactory settlement of the Irish National 
 demand. The word " provisional " had been stamped in red ink
 
 108 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 across every page of the Bill. . . . He should say that the 
 Bill, as it now stood, could, under no conceivable circumstances, 
 afford a full, final, or satisfactory settlement of the question." 
 He specially objected to the financial clauses ; he said that it 
 would be impossible to carry on the government of Ireland under 
 those clauses, and that they would bring about national bank- 
 ruptcy to that country. 
 
 THURSDAY, AUGUST 31st SECOND DAY OF THE THIRD 
 
 READING. 
 
 Mr. Tritton (Norwood) referred to the Prime Minister's state- 
 ment that the pleas put forward by the Opposition against the 
 Bill were " enormous, hideous, and monstrous falsehoods." He 
 asked if the -pleas that had been -made by the Protestants of Ire- 
 land were to be described in these terms, and ex-pressed surprise 
 that the Prime Minister who owed his -position to the Noncon- 
 formist votes in England at the last election should express 
 such opinions of the appeals that were put forward against this 
 unrighteous Bill by the Protestant bodies in Ireland. 
 
 Sir Charles Russell, the Attorney-General (South Hackney) 
 made a speech in support of the Bill, but cleverly passed over the 
 main points of the Bill, such as the retention of the Irish mem- 
 bers, the financial clauses, and the question of the land, which 
 had not been discussed at all. 
 
 Mr. T. W. Russell (South Tyrone), speaking for the people 
 of Ulster, objected to be governed by men whose record in the 
 past gave no guarantee for good government in the future. The 
 Government were proposing to read a Bill a third time, two-thirds 
 of which had never been discussed by the House. He spoke of 
 the present system of Irish elementary education which was set up 
 60 years ago. It had worked marvels. The children of dif- 
 ferent denominations had met together in the same school with 
 beneficent effect. Minorities, and the rights of conscience, were 
 protected by rules and by conscience clauses. A Protestant child 
 was safe in a Roman Catholic school, and a Catholic child was 
 safe in a Protestant school. The Government, however, was now 
 going to hand over that system, which had done so much for the 
 Irish, to be controlled by men who had sworn eternal enmity to 
 mixed education. 
 
 Sir Henry James (Bury) opposed the Third Reading. The 
 House of Lords, he said, would refuse to pass it until it had 
 the approval of the people of the country, and it was only by this 
 means that the measure could be placed before the constituencies 
 at all. The House of Lords would say, " We demand that be- 
 fore Great Britain is separated from Ireland and ruled by Irish 
 members, the electors of Great Britain shall express their opinion." 
 He referred to the revelations before the Judges at the Parnell 
 Commission, and said that the men to whom those revelations 
 related were the men to be entrusted with the task of governing 
 Ireland. He referred to the position of the Exchequer Judges
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 
 
 to be appointed in Ireland to decide on Imperial matters. He 
 pointed out that these Judges had no executive power to carry 
 out their decrees. He said their position would be the laughing- 
 stock, not only of this country, but of the people throughout the 
 world. 
 
 FRIDAY, SEPT. 1st THIRD DAY OF THE THIRD 
 
 READING. 
 
 Mr. Justin McCarthy (North Longford), on behalf of his. 
 section of the Nationalist party, thanked the Prime Minister for 
 bringing in the Bill, which, he said, would receive a cordial wel- 
 come on their part. He fenced with the question of finality, and 
 said that the Bill contained a final principle. It was, neverthe- 
 less, absurd to suppose that that or any other measure could be 
 final in any rigid or pedantic sense. 
 
 Mr. Chamberlain pointed out that Mr. McCarthy had 
 guarded himself as to accepting the Bill as a final 
 measure and accepting the measure with a cordial wel- 
 come. With a separate Parliament and a separate Executive in 
 Ireland, the Irish could hamper and embarrass our foreign policy. 
 He pointed out that, in the Bill, the idea of the supremacy of the 
 Imperial Parliament was entirely abandoned; that the protection 
 of the minorities was a farce; and that these minorities were told 
 to rely on the generosity and goodwill of the Irish Legislature, 
 which would be composed of men who had threatened and de- 
 nounced the minorities in question, and who had declared that 
 they would take vengeance upon them whenever they had the 
 opportunity. He spoke of the secrecy with which the Bill had 
 been prepared a secrecy which was also practised with the Bill 
 of 1886. When he (Mr. Chamberlain) at that time joined the 
 Government, Mr. Gladstone declared that he was not committed 
 to the policy of Home Rule. He (Mr. Chamberlain) ridiculed 
 the charge that they wished to re-establish the Protestant ascend- 
 ancy. Equal laws and equal privileges existed at present through- 
 out Ireland, but the Home Rule Bill would establish an 
 ascendancy of the Catholic priesthood and of the promoters of 
 the Land League. He alluded to the promise of the Prime 
 Minister, that the majority of the British people should be con- 
 sulted about the retention of Irish members in the Imperial Par- 
 liament, and he declared that he (the Prime Minister) had thrown 
 all his pledges and promises to the winds. In concluding, Mr. 
 Chamberlain said that the Unionist party would appeal to the 
 good sense of the British people to save them from being made 
 the laughing-stock of all mankind. 
 
 Sir Edward Grey (Berwick), Under Secretary for Foreign 
 Affairs, defended the Bill on behalf of the Government. He 
 went over Mr. Gladstone's arguments. While admitting the 
 strength of the feeling on the part of the members for Ulster, he 
 denied the force of their arguments. After all, he said, they 
 spoke only for a minority of the Irish people.
 
 110 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 Colonel Saunderson (North Armagh) spoke against the Bill ; 
 he again pleaded for the Ulster minority ; and he declared that 
 all the safeguards in the Bill were shams and delusions. He 
 pointed out that the Bill was only being passed by gagging the 
 British members, and he asserted that before the measure could be 
 thrust down the throats of the Ulster people the forces of the 
 Crown would have to be employed against the loyal population. 
 
 Mr. R. Wallace (Edinburgh), a Gladstonian, denounced the 
 Bill, and declared that he would not vote for the third reading. 
 In a long and eloquent speech he pointed out the objections to 
 the measure, and said the result of the Bill might be the creation 
 of fresh Irish discontent in Dublin, and of intrigue in the Parlia- 
 ment at Westminster. He was no friend of the House of Lords, 
 but he believed that by throwing out the Bill that House would be 
 strengthened. By the gth Clause dealing with the retention of 
 Irish members the Bill now said that self-government was right 
 for Ireland, but that it was wrong for Great Britain. When the 
 Scotch people came to understand that their seventy-two members 
 were to have no voice in the proposed Irish Parliament, but that 
 the Irish were to have 80 members in the House of Commons to 
 control Scotch affairs, they would object to such a proposal. 
 
 Mr. Balfour made a powerful speech against the Bill. 
 Having referred to the shameful interference with the liberty of 
 debate, he pointed out that the Irish Nationalists had refused to 
 commit themselves to the Bill as a final settlement. He asserted 
 that the Unionists were backed up by a majority of the people of 
 Great Britain, and that the House of Lords in throwing out the 
 Bill, in order that the measure might be placed before the con- 
 stituencies, would receive the approbation of the people. The 
 Government were anxious to finish the Third Reading and to get 
 rid of the Bill, but they knew that it was dead. Gladstonians 
 could not in future deceive the electors, because they (the electors) 
 now had the Bill before them, and knew what Home Rule meant. 
 
 Mr. John Morley (Newcastle) replied to the statements of 
 Unionist members, and to their quotations from speeches of Glad- 
 stonians. He did not, however, deal with the Bill itself, or even 
 attempt to answer any of the arguments against its provisions. 
 
 Colonel Nolan (North Galway) made a short speech, in which 
 he protested against the financial clauses of the Bill, and said 
 that Ireland ought to have more favourable terms. 
 
 The House then divided on Mr. Courtney's amendment for 
 the rejection of the Bill. This was defeated by a majority of 
 thirty-four. 
 
 The Third Reading was then passed, by a majority of thirty- 
 four, amidst a scene of great excitement, the Irish members and 
 Gladstonians waving their hats and cheering the Prime Minister, 
 and the House adjourned at one o'clock in the morning.
 
 WITH NOTES ON THE 1893 BILL 111 
 
 According to the Times, an analysis of the division lists on 
 the Third Reading of the Bill shows that the majority of 303 
 (including tellers) was composed of 184 members representing 
 constituencies in England and Wales, 39 Scotch members, and 
 80 Irish members; while the minority of 269 (also including 
 tellers) consisted of 229 English and Welsh members, 17 Scotch 
 members, and 23 Irish members. The list of pairs included 92 
 members, 37 English and 9 Scotch being for the Bill, and 40 
 English and 6 Scotch against. The net result of the division, 
 therefore, taking into account the members who were paired as 
 well as those who actually voted, was : For the Third Reading, 
 349; against, 315. This gives a total of 664. The six members 
 whose names do not appear in either of the division lists or the 
 lists of pairs are the Speaker (who never votes unless to deter- 
 mine a tie), Messrs. Wallace and Rathbone, who deliberately ab- 
 stained, and Sir Edward Watkin, Baron H. de Worms, and Mr. 
 J. Wilson (Durham), who were absent unpaired. Of the 495 
 English and Welsh members, 490 were accounted for, 221 being 
 in favour of the measure and 269 against; while of the 72 Scotch 
 members 71 voted, 43 being in favour of the measure and 23 
 against. Every one of the Irish members (103 in all) voted, 80 
 for the Bill and 23 against. 
 
 The final decision of Great Britain, therefore, is as 
 follows : 
 
 For the Bill 269 
 
 Against 292 
 
 Majority against 23 
 
 The voice of England and Wales is even more conclusive, 
 the figures being: 
 
 For the Bill 221 
 
 Against 269 
 
 Majority against 48 
 
 We have now concluded a sketch of the progress of the Home 
 Rule Bill through the House of Commons. The debate has, we 
 trust, made clear the true meaning and significance of the 
 measure. 
 
 Three-quarters of the Bill have not been discussed at all, 
 and, with regard to many of the clauses and amendments, discus- 
 sion was cut short by the closure. Several of the undiscussed 
 clauses, such as those relating to the land, the re-distribution of 
 seats, and other constitutional questions were of vital importance. 
 On almost every division a majority of British members has been 
 against the Government. The Gladstonian members have voted 
 one way on one day, and another way on another day exactly, 
 in fact, as they were ordered.
 
 112 THE MEANING OF HOME RULE 
 
 The result of the discussion is to place the issue plainly before 
 the electors of Great Britain. That issue is, as Mr. Chamberlain 
 put it " Whether the interests of Great Britain are to be con- 
 trolled by delegates from Ireland, nominated by priests, elected 
 by illiterates, and subsidised by the enemies of this country." 
 
 HOUSE OF LORDS. 
 
 The Bill was sent to the House of Lords, where it was 
 defeated on the second reading by a majority of 378. 
 
 Printed by CHARLES JONES LIMITED, 27-28-2S), Cursitor Street, London, E.C.
 

 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-25m-9,'47(A5618)444 
 
 UNIVERSH 
 
 AT 
 LOS ANC,r,i d
 
 PLEA*C DO NOT REMOVE 
 THIS BOOK CARD ! 
 
 University Research Library