Then Lord Salisbury dwelt on the very natural reluctance of
Ulster to be put under the heel of the Irish Party, which had planned and executed the whole conspiracy against the peace and prosperity of Irish life. For this part of his speech he has been represented as playing the Hie of the Anarchist, and instigating Ulster to rebellion. That is a very unjust representation of what he said. Perhaps the strongest sen- tence was this :—" Parliament has a right to govern the people of Ulster. It has not a right to sell them into slavery ; and I do not believe in the unlimited, unrestricted power of Parlia- ments, any more than I do in the unrestricted power of Kings. Parliaments, like Kings, may take a course which, while it is technically within the legal limits of their attributes, is yet entirely at variance and in conflict with the understanding of the institutions by which they rule." We believe that Lord Salisbury there laid down a substantially sound doctrine, as we have elsewhere argued, though he should have guarded himself against giving the impression that he wished to see
Ulster up in arms against any Home-rule settlement. That is not a course which English statesmen should instigate, though they may fairly, or even passionately, protest against any attempt to put down such resistance to the compulsory transfer of our fellow-subjects' allegiance, if it occurs, by force of arms.
