On the Tuesday, Mr. Matthews called attention to the hint
dropped recently by Mr. Gladstone that, under certain circum- stances, it might be necessary to have recourse to a simple repeal of the Union. It is an open question, Mr. Gladstone said, in one of his recent letters, whether, " if this folly lasts, the thing may not, in the end, contribute to Repeal, which I shall greatly regret." That, no doubt, is a very significant hint. But we differ from Mr. Matthews in thinking that Repeal would be much worse than the plan actually proposed. It would be in many respects simpler, and less likely to breed constant quarrels. But, of course, it is out of the question as a real solution of the relations of England and Ireland ; and • the English constituencies show more and more that they do not intend to allow the creation of a separate Legislature in any part of the United Kingdom. As for the Irish landlords, as Mr. Matthews justly and pithily said, if no Land Bill were passed,—and the Radical Unionists opposed Mr. Gladstone's Bill as the very worst part of his scheme,—then "the Dublin Parliament would make about as short work of the Irish land- lords " [speaking metaphorically, of course] " as a butcher did of a lamb." Mr. Matthews did not make a good figure in Parliament when he represented Dungarvan ; but in his Bir- mingham speeches he has exhibited some of the most remarkable qualities of a popular orator,—great terseness, great vivacity, and considerable eloquence. The "No Popery " cry seems to have had absolutely no effect.
Previous page
