THE IRISH " NEGOTIATIONS " AT BOULOGNE.
WE cannot conceive a matter of less interest to any one except the Irish Home-rulers and those who are dependent on them, than the question which appears to have been the subject of the " delicate and difficult" negotiations at Boulogne. Whether Mr. Justin McCarthy is to be the leader of the revolted Parnellites, or Mr. William O'Brien, between this time and the General Election, can interest no sane British subject. "Strange if such difference there be, 'twixt Tweedledum and Tweedledee." It may be a matter of serious interest to Mr. Parnell if his authority were to be in any way acknow- ledged as appointing Mr. O'Brien, for certainly his authority was deliberately thrown off by Mr. Justin McCarthy ; and the chances are, we think, that Michael Davitt will still prove to have influence enough to pre- vent its being again acknowledged, even if the Irish Catholic Bishops and priests are willing to accept the rumoured compromise. It may make a serious difference to the evicted tenants of New Tipperary, whether Mr. O'Brien shall obtain the means of fulfilling his pledges to them or not. But to general English politicians, the sub- ject is one of absolutely no intrinsic interest, and except in one particular light, it would not be worth while even to notice it at all.
But there is one point of view,—namely, in relation to the action taken by Mr. Gladstone on the meeting of Parliament in deference to the urgency of British Home- rulers,—in which the matter of these negotiations is of some interest, we mean in relation to the deference either paid or not paid by Irish Members to the letter of Mr. Glad- stone to Mr. Morley. It is quite true that Mr. Glad- stone in that letter protested only against Mr. Parnell's " continuance in the leadership at the present moment," which Mr. Gladstone now interprets as equivalent to imme- diate but not temporary retirement a meaning which we do not think it would suggest to any reader. But whether the retirement was meant to be only for a time, or was meant to be permanent, Mr. Gladstone's intervention certainly represented a protest on the part of the " con- science " of his supporters,—Nonconformist and otherwise, —against any sort of co-operation with such a leader as Mr. Parnell. And the dictation of an even temporary retire- ment therefore could only have meant that Mr. Parnell must recognise the justice of the public opinion which had declared against him, and show a certain amount of shame for his disgraceful conduct, before he could be again admitted as an ally of the Gladstonians. But as a matter of fact, if he only retires now till the General Election, and that only by way of compromise, no one can suppose that it will indicate any sort of penitence. He has never said a word evincing either shame or regret ; and if Mr. O'Brien should succeed in his " delicate and difficult " task, Mr. Parnell's retirement would mean nothing in the world but a new bid for the leadership on the easiest terms on which he could hope to get an undisputed claim to it. Now, would that satisfy the conscience which dictated Mr. Gladstone's letter ? Would the electors who were so shocked at the notion of their leader co-operating with Mr. Parnell fresh from the Divorce Court, be content with a merely nominal penalty of this kind which implied no sort of shame and regret ? If they would, we must say that the conscience of the Gladstonians is a very easy conscience after all, and might almost just as well have been a dormant conscience too. It is like a political " indulgence "• to grant absolution so easily for a sin which has not in any sense been repudiated or repented. But if the conscience of the Gladstonians is not satisfied by so formal a penance as this, then the only result of such a compromise,—if such a compromise were agreed to, as we do not believe it will be,—would be to leave the electors whose consciences Aveiro alarmed, still alienated from the Gladstonian cause, and determined not to vote for a Home-rule which would be followed by Mr. Parnell's return to the head of the Irish Party, and his assumption of the highest place in the first Irish Adminis- tration. Mr. Gladstone would receive protests enough if he allowed Mr. Parnell, shameless and unrepentant, to purchase by a mere nominal retirement a restora- tion to all his "old authority of position, and would be told that it was not for such a farce as that that the Gladstonians had intimated the difficulty they would feel in supporting any chief who had condoned Mr. Par- nell's conduct. It is hardly conceivable that the crisis brought about by Mr. Gladstone's letter should result in nothing better than a short holiday to Mr. Parnell, followed by a General Election in which he would resume all his old prominence. At least, if it were, it would be, we suspect, a General Election in which the alarmed consciences of Gladstonians would find it needful, in multitudes of cases, to keep their owners away from the poll. In other words, the object of Mr. Gladstone's letter to Mr. Morley would not be answered. We should not think much of the Nonconformist conscience, or of any other conscience, which should content itself, under such circum- stances, with a barren protest quite fruitless of any substantial result.
However, we have no expectation that the compromise imputed to the Boulogne diplomatists, or anything at all like it, will be accepted by the Anti-Parnellites. It does not satisfy Michael Davitt, it cannot satisfy the Irish Bishops and priesthood, and it cannot satisfy the Gladstonians themselves. In all probability the negotia- tion has only served to advertise Mr. O'Brien, and to keep the eyes of Irishmen fixed in admiration on. the great conference of Boulogne. That conference has not had its parallel for fussy insignificance since the dissolution of the " Fourth Party."
Previous page
