TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE LORDS AND THE LAST CHANCE OF COMPROMISE.
WHATEVER may have been said, and reasonably said, up to Wednesday last of the firm deter- mination of the Irish Members not to take any Bill which the Unionists could offer, it will be impossible to say this after Mr. Dillon's speech on the third reading of Mr. Morley's Bill, which will always be called, we suppose, the Evicted Tenants Bill, though Mr. Morley has now rechristened it "The Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Migration and Arbitration Bill." Wednesday's debate unquestionably revealed a split in the Irish party as to the policy of accepting whatever the Unionist party could on their own principles concede for the remedy of the grievances of the wretched beings whom either the accidents of the Courts of Law or the wiles of the Plan of Campaign" have placed in a situation harder than that which Parlia- ment intended for them, and harder than that which their landlords would be inclined to impose, if they could themselves afford to give relief. It is clear now that Mr. William O'Brien and Mr. Dillon, though they worked together, and worked together eagerly, in that great blunder, as well as great crime, called the "Plan of Campaign " agitation, now differ widely as to the true policy of their party towards the Unionists. Last Wednesday Mr. W. O'Brien made a violent speech full of burning wrath against the landlords and of self-satisfaction as regards his own achievements in Ireland, which certainly reads as if it were intended to extinguish the last hope of anything like compromise. But just at the close of the debate his colleague, Mr. Dillon, rose and spoke in a very different tone. Mr. Dillon then said, that "he greatly feared a Voluntary Bill would not lead to a settlement of the existing difficulty, but his view on that subject would be largely modified if any declaration were to be made on the part of the Irish landlords to the effect that they would facilitate a settlement under a voluntary measure." He added that "both sides in Ireland were, he believed, tired of this cruel struggle which had been the fruitful parents of suffering and misery. It would be worthy of that House if dismissing old, worn-out charges and recriminations,—it being admitted, if they wished, that he was himself a criminal of the darkest dye, —and approaching the question simply in the spirit of statesmen, they were to make one supreme effort to solve that problem." We have never concealed that we do regard the "Plan of Campaign" in very much the same light in which Mr. Dillon consents to let his opponents regard it, if only they will now make a serious effort for peace. But when such an advance as this has been made towards the Unionist position by one of the most responsible of the party of Irish agitators, we must say that we think the Duke of Devonshire and the other Unionist statesmen in the Lords ought to take advantage of it, and not echo the despairing or (in some mouths) the possibly exultant cry, "Too late ! too late ! " In the House of Commons it was too late. Only Mr. Morley was allowed to speak after Mr. Dillon, and he was obviously tot altogether sorry to think it was too late. Probably many of his colleagues in their eagerness for new charges against the Lords, do desire to see the Lords reject the Bill without an effort to recast it in a shape in which honest Unionists like Mr. T. W. Russell and. Mr. Chamber- lain could accept it. That is, we fear, the position with only too many of the Gladstonian party, and also with the Conservatives, who have shown themselves deter- mined to avenge the reckless application of the Closure by Sir William Harcourt, and to extinguish any remaining hope of compromise. But that is not, to our minds, an attitude that a statesman like the Duke of Devonshire ought to countenance by his great authority. The application of the Closure to this Bill was, we sincerely think, in some re- spects a tactical expedient on the part of an unscrupulous leader in the Commons who earnestly wished to extinguish the last chance of compromise. The House of Lords is bound, if they can, to defeat that manceuvre, not to lend it their aid. The only question for them as statesmen is this :—Would a voluntary measure which gave a chance 10 willing landlords, of restoring those of the evicted tenants whom they themselves thought might justly be restored, be likely to advance the cause of peace and order in Ireland without holding out a temptation to lawless and greedy agitators to pursue the same policy of criminal agitation again? Now we know that such men as Mr. Balfour, Mr. T. W. Russell, Mr. Cham- berlain, and many others of the Unionist party, think deliberately that it would. And if so, after such a speech as Mr. Dillon's, which if it does not actually say peceavi. certainly does say that his opponents are at liberty to, think him a great sinner against Ireland in starting the "Plan of Campaign," we hold that the Lords are bound to seize the opportunity, and to transform the Bill from a premium on bad faith, into one which allows and even encourages Irish landlords to restore both those tenants who have missed the advantages which the State meant to give them, but of which legal technicalities or misfortunes have deprived them, and also those who are believed by their best friends to be heartily sorry for the reckless step to which they were tempted by meaner and craftier natures than their own. Of course we would allow- no tampering at all with the just rights of the new tenants. But to those who are the victims of either mis- fortune or craft, and whom the landlords would be willing to restore if they had the means, we think that there is now an opportunity of showing a compassion which would not promote dishonesty and menace in future. Thus the question 13 whether, if any of the Unionist Peers think as Mr. Balfour and Mr. T. W. Russell and Mr. Chamberlain think, they should not make a. last effort to avert the policy of rejecting the Bill on its second reading next Monday as Lord Balfour of Burleigh has proposed to do. We believe that even if in the present greatly irritated: condition of the Conservative party, that attempt failed, as it probably would, the effort to make that attempt would still have good results and greatly improve the situation for the future. It appears to us that the House of Lords could hardly vindicate their position in the State better than by giving the House of Commons a last chance of reconsidering its position when such a speech as Mr. Dillon's holds out that chance in the plainest and most striking way. Of course it may not succeed. It is quite possible that even Mr. Dillon himself would not in the end accept such a compromise as the Unionists could alone offer. And it is possible that intriguers in the Commons for new accusations against the Lords,. would do their best to wreck the amended Bill even if it were recast and sent down to them. But should not the attempt be made ? With the exception of Lord Grey, all the best political authorities believe that such a measure could be framed and would be useful. And Lord Grey is now so committed to the attitude of a ken dater temporis esti, that he can hardly bring himself to face the situation in Ireland as it really is. The two days intervening between this and Monday furnish, we must say, extremely meagre time for any change of strategy. Still, even if that time be quite too short, and the result shows that it is too short, it is of the greatest importance to prove to the world that there are still legislators left who will ignore altogether the mischief-making of Sir William Harcourt in. applying the gag to the House of Commons, and who will make a supreme effort to show those Irishmen who, like Mr. Dillon, are weary of strife, and at least half-repentant. for what they have done, that there are still statesmen outside the Commons who will meet them half-way and try to effect any honourable settlement that may still be open to us. The Unionists in the Lords have a great i opportunity before them of showing a courage n which the House of Commons has been found deficient.
Previous page
