On Wednesday there was an animated discussion on a pro-
posal intended to prevent the Irish Parliament from conferring special educational privileges on any one religious denomina- tion. Mr. Gladstone declared that the Government " were not so attached to their own language as to refuse, if that language required enlargement, to give a favourable consideration to an amendment" intended to prevent preference ; and with this somewhat nebulous concession the Unionists had to be content. An amendment which would have prevented the establishment of a Catholic University was also negatived. Mr. Gerald Balfour sought to prevent the Irish Parliament from passing laws " determining the qualifications necessary to the holding of any judicial office, or of any office of the executive Government," but this was lost by 35 votes• (266 to 231). Mr. Darling moved words to prevent the passing of Bills of Attainder by the Irish Legislature.. Sir Charles Russell, who has returned from Paris, tried to treat the proposal as a joke, and declared also that the " due- process of law " provision covered the ground. Since, how- ever, the American Constitution expressly forbids Bills of Attainder, and since an Irish Parliament once spent most of its time in concocting a wholesale Bill of Attainder,. the amendment was a perfectly reasonable one. It was de- feated by 39 votes (280 to 241). Is it not permissible to ask why the new words should have been objected to, if the Irish would never dream of following the precedent of James II.'s Parliament ? Prima facie, we should say it was quite impossible, but the unwillingness of the Irish to. allow the amendment makes us doubtful.
Previous page
