Of the general characteristics of Lord Rosebery's speech last Saturday
in Edinburgh, we have said enough in other columns of this journal. He began by complaining of the criticism which his speech in the House of Lords had pro- voked, which he thought was "not animated by that benevo- lence which alone makes criticism at all tolerable," and at a later point in his speech he asked, " was ever a Government placed in so terrible a difficulty " as the Government from the headship of which Mr. Gladstone had retired ? " Was ever a Government met, I venture to think, in the Press and in Parliament, with so little of generosity or of consideration? " And Lord Rosebery was evidently not alluding to Mr. Labou- chere's little effort at political infanticide, for he immediately describes that as " a harmless and possibly a beneficent at- tempt and intention to strangle the babe in its cradle." To what then did he allude ? We should have been inclined to say that, except as regards Mr. Laboucheres enterprise, no Government was ever received with more generosity or con- sideration. We fear the new Prime Minister is thin-skinned. He defended what be had said of the necessity of converting England to Home-rule, by remarking that the resistance of Ulster is really due to the English majority against Home- rule,—which is quite a delusion of Lord Rosebery's,—and that the action of the House of Lords was also due to this con- fidence of theirs in the backing of England,—which we hold to be quite true and perfectly legitimate. Indeed, Lord Rose- bery's address in the House of Lords was so sound in principle that we cannot but sincerely regret his qualified and not quite candid retractation.
