Yesterday week there was a smart encounter in the Upper
House between Lord Londonderry, the late Viceroy of Ireland, and Lord Spencer. Lord Camperdown commenced the debate by describing the intimidation practised on Mr. Smith-Barry's estate at Tipperary, and complaining that the action of Mr. Gladstone and Lord Spencer tended to encourage this lawless organisation. Lord Londonderry then rose, and delivered a very animated attack on Lord Spencer, denying that there is any truth in the statement that it was Lord Spencer's experience in Ireland which had changed his view of the Home-rule issue. Even in 1886 Lord Spencer had condemned Lord Salisbury's Government for not having renewed some of the most effective provisions of the Crimes Act of 1882. It was true that Lord Spencer had changed his views since he was Lord-Lieutenant, but it was not during his experience of the working of the present system in the administration of Ireland, that he changed his view. That change was a subsequent process. Lord Spencer replied with his usual equanimity. He admitted frankly enough that he had not become a Home-ruler during his Lord-Lieutenancy. He had become one since that time, because he thought that all the resources of the present system had been used, and had been used in vain. The whole force of this argument depends on Lord Spencer's personal estimate of the comparative danger of persevering in a policy which does not conciliate Ireland but does enforce order there, and of entering on a policy which may or may not conciliate Ireland, but whether it did or did not, would certainly not enforce order there. As Lord Spencer's opinion on that point has undergone a radical change since he ceased to be Lord-Lieutenant, it is impossible to maintain that it was his administrative experience which caused the change.,, If it had been, surely it would have come sooner and more gradually. But Lord Spencer's calm indifference to attack is worthy of all praise.
