On Wednesday evening Mr. Chamberlain caused no little sensation by
the frankness of his speech. He was strongly in favour of making concessions to the Roman Catholics, but what was given to them must, he urged, be given to " us,"— and by " us " he meant the political party with which he acted in the House. Later on Mr. Chamberlain declared that what " we " who talk of the separation of the duty of the State from the duty of the parent desire "is not secularism, but a division of duty and conscience." When asked by the Prime Minister what " we " meant in this context, Mr. Chamberlain answered that on the present occasion " we " meant those who agreed with him. Next Mr. Chamberlain stated that the principle that "no test as to their religious opinions should be exacted from teachers at the time of their first appointment" was one "in which I think we all agree." Upon this Sir Henry Campbell. Bannerman asked Mr. Chamberlain, " What particular 'we' is it this time?" To this Mr. Chamberlain replied : "I have just consulted with my right hon. friend Mr. Balfour, and I believe that during the whole of this debate no one on this side of the House has expressed anything inconsistent with what I have just said. If so, on this occasion I may claim that 'we' represents the Unionist Party." Not unnaturally, Mr. Chamberlain's declaration in regard to tests caused some sensation in the House, as the party with whom he acts have hitherto declared that tests are absolutely necessary. Whether Mr. Chamberlain's remarks, after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, foreshadow any change of attitude we cannot say ; but we are inclined to think that his admission will in the end be found to have a dialectical rather than a substantial importance.
Previous page
