A GLADSTONIAN PROTEST.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "srE0peTou."] Sin,—Two errors, of a dangerous and far-reaching kind, are at present being made. The first, that a majority, however large, can make what is unjust, righteous. The proposal of the Scottish Established Church, for example, to ask a separate plebiscite on this question is an example. If the majority of electors in Scotland may vote all the teind to themselves because they are a majority, of course the ma oiity in Wales or in Ireland may do the same. The English majority against Home rule, too, is another case in point. Scotland has in the past carried by its Liberal vote many of the great reforms you have advocated, but not till this Irish question, on which you differ from the Scottish majority, have we ever heard of the nationalities, of which the House of Commons is composed, being singled out as you Unionists are doing. The policy of the Government is righteous and it is expedient, or the reverse; and no majority, either way, can change the morality of the questions at issue. The other error, which you seem to favour, is the proposal to refer great questions to the Referendum. As one of your cor- respondents ably points out, this would destroy representative government, and abolish the influence of the House of Com- mons. It would also greatly tend to foster the delusion that a majority can turn wrong into right, and confound the words " righteousness " and "power" as if they were identical. Happily, your proposal is impossible. Let the Queen dissolve Parliament to-morrow, and every parish church would become a place of political agitation. Meetings would be held all over Scotland on Sabbaths, and violent speeches made from the pulpits. The public-houses, too, would become the com- mittee-rooms of the politicians who feel that their craft is in danger.
While it may be true that teetotalers and Disestablishers and Labour men would vote for Home-rule—not because they care two straws for it—you will admit that Churchmen and the whole liquor-trade would vote against it, not because of any intelligent view of the history of Ireland and the aspira- tions of Irishmen, but because the sure way to put an end to Temperance legislation and Disestablishment would be to destroy Mr. Gladstone's Government. The policy of a Re- ferendum which Lord Salisbury favours is, therefore, not only destructive of the British Constitution, which is founded on the free expression of opinion in representative assemblies, but even if we did adopt Lord Salisbury's suggestion, it would in practice be utterly unworkable, as electors on both sides neither could nor would confine themselves to any one ques- tion, but would be influenced by the whole policy of the two parties in their relation to the various subjects which touch their feelings, convictions, or interests.—I am, Sir, &c., [It was the Home-rulers who first began the habit of singling out the Irish majority as proving the right of Ire- 1 yid to a separate Legislature. The marvellous assumptions of our correspondent's letter are truly Gladstonian.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
