Mr. Plunket on Wednesday made an effective party speech at
Gloucester, which, however, tailed off towards the end. He tried with some skill to accentuate the differences between Lord Hartington and Mr. Chamberlain; he painted in rose. colour the present condition of Ireland under Lord Carnarvon ; he argued forcibly that it was Mr. Chamberlain, as well as the Tories, who had refused a renewal of the Crimes Act ; and he pointed out, quite truly, that Mr. Parnell, ever since he made his speech about taking his coat off, has avowed a policy of separation. But then he said,—" No, the demand which is made to-day with so much daring is not the result of any imaginary surrender of the present Government to Mr. Parnell ; it is the true result of the surrender of Lord Hartingtou and the Whigs to Mr. Chamberlain and the Radicals on this question of the Irish franchise." If Mr. Parnell said the same thing six years ago, then his saying it now is not the result either of Tory surrender or of the changed franchise. The truth is that Mr. Parnell has not changed, but that the new franchise has given him more power, and the Tory surrender a hope that the power will be effective. He calculates just as Mr. Jefferson Davis did, and, if history is worth anything, with as inaccurate a result. States are not dismembered by votes, or there would be a Southern Confederation now.
Previous page
