" CO-OPERATION " OR " CONSENT " ?
r To THE EDITOR OP TIM "SPECTATOR.") SIR,—It is worth observing that the word " consent " is being
offered to the Unionists for their ruin. Their present position is that they " consent " to nothing whatever in the Home Rule Bill. If, however, the Government become desirous of amending their own Bill so as, in the opinion of the Unionists, to mitigate some of its evils, then the Unionists can consistently co-operate in bringing about such mitigation or part-destruction of the Bill, on the principle that a small dose of poison is to be preferred to a larger dose. But such "co-operation," if clearly defined, will not imply any "consent" to the Bill as amended, nor engage them in any joint responsi- bility for its results.—I am, Sir, &c., [Exactly. A man does not consent to a very dangerous type of car being driven when he does his best to get the owner to minimize the risks by making a few alterations in the direction of safety.—En. Spectator.]
Previous page
