On Monday, Mr. Stansfeld commenced his reply to Sir R.
Cross, who had opened the Irish debate in a very moderate but not otherwise remarkable speech, by a powerful attack on Lord Salisbury's speech of Saturday, and then proceeded to declare that he held the Bill to be final because the Irish Members said so, because the people who dreamed of Separation were not Irish Nationalists, and because any Irish Member who thought of it would be "in a condition of lunacy." Considering that Mr. Parnell has always avowed Separation to be his end, that is scarcely civil from his ally. Mr. Stansfeld denied that the authority of the Imperial Parliament was diminished, contending that the Bill would. only be an Act delegating certain powers so long as the Act should continue, and that by resummoning the Irish 103, the Act could be repealed at once. He denied that there were two nations in Ireland, though there was
a small minority, so unsympathetic with the majority that it was not even attracted by Home-rule ; and the existence of that minority proved the badness of our government, which, indeed, had forced millions of Irishmen to expatriate themselves. (What forced the millions of Englishmen and Scotchmen P) He believed in nationality, and held that Ireland, once free, would insist on being governed by resident Irishmen, and would reject control or guidance from Irish-Americans, a remark which, with the cheers that followed it, we recommend to the attention of Mr. Parnell's subscribers.
