On Monday night the weight of the debate fell on
Lord Randolph Churchill and Sir Charles Russell. The former clearly was determined, while opposing the present Bill, not to pledge himself never to bring in another of the same kind. He pressed, for example, the argument that the Bill degrades Ireland into the position of a Colony ; argued that the form of the new Parliament was ridiculous ; denounced most of the restrictions in the Bill, either as useless or as evidences of a dis- trust which should be fatal to the Bill altogether ; and depre- ciated the importance of the Parnellite Party, which, he con- tended, would not long hang together. His speech, in fact, left it open to him to propose one day a Federal plan. It was, however, full of isolated "points," one of the best, perhaps, being that the Irish Government, having its revenue levied for it by the British Government, might contrive to get on without calling a Parliament at all. Another was his reply to Mr. Gladstone's argument that law was discredited in Ireland, because it came from foreigners and in a foreign garb. Then, retorted Lord Randolph, this Act, "this Magna Charta of Ireland," will be discredited before it begins to work, for it comes from the same foreigners and in the same foreign garb. He repudiated, too, very effectively the "contingent terrorism " which he attributed to the Chief Secretary, declaring that politicians must work, as railway passengers must travel, without considering that a lunatic or a criminal might blow up the train. The speech was effective, but Parliamentary.
Previous page
