A WARNING TO THE OPPONENTS OF THE BILL.
THE true danger of the moment seems to us to threaten us not from the strength of the friends of the Irish measure, but from the reluctance of its opponents to face clearly the issue before them. We would rather by far see the second reading of the Bill carried with a clear notice to the country of what it means, than see it defeated without the clearest apprehension by the people of the kind of struggle before us. It is of no use to defeat the second reading unless the people of Great Britain fully understand that they are distinctly at issue with the majority of the Irish electors, and that they mean to warn the Irish people that it is so, and that on a ques- tion on which the future of the United Kingdom depends, they will not and cannot give way. There is a feeble impression abroad that it is quite enough to assert broadly the authority of Parliament over any statutory Legislature that may be established in Dublin, and over any Irish Executive that may be appointed by that Legislature, and that such an assertion of authority will be a victory for Union. It will be nothing of the kind. Even the Government maintain that abstract authority, and it is of no more use for a State to assert an abstract authority which will not be and cannot be practically used, than it is for a father to assert the abstract right to control a child whom in practice he abandons to his own self- will. What the dissolution should show is this,—whether the British people mean to assert and to maintain the real unity of the two islands in all essentials, both administrative and legislative, or to concede to Ireland a virtual or a real separation. This is a case in which there is not merely one sound and one unsound course, but only one sound course with various more or less unsound courses. Now, in our belief, the only sound course is to let the Irish people know explicitly that both Legislature and Government, in all matters essen- tially affecting the weal or woe of these two islands, are to remain at the centre, and that that is the resolve of the people of Great Britain, however serious may prove the effort which it will involve ; that decentralisation can only be con- ceded on matters really and truly local,—on matters, to give a clear though rough description of them, which come under the category of private Bill legislation. The assertion of this principle, and of this principle in the most explicit terms, is the only sound course. The people ought to know, and ought to be told in the most serious way, that it is no light step which is being taken in joining issue on the Bill; that if we defeat it, our policy ought to be to govern Ireland well,— as well as Scotland, as well as any part of England or Wales,— and on principles as truly Irish as those on which Scotland is governed are truly Scotch, or on which England is governed are truly English,—but to govern her from the same legislative and administrative centre as this island. Unless the Irish people are made to feel that this is the issue presented to the electors, and that on this issue the electors of Great Britain return a thoroughly explicit and resolute reply, we shall be none the better for a dissolution ; we shall go on fumbling at the ques- tion in a light "neither clear nor dark." That is the real and clear decision for which Unionists ought to struggle. But failing that, we would rather a great deal see Separation at once, than a misunderstanding out of which Separation in a worse form must ultimately emerge. And we would rather even see Mr. Gladstone's proposal definitely accepted, though
in our opinion that must lead to Separation by a circuitous and thorny path, than we would see some half-and-half prin- ciple accepted such as some of our leaders have proposed,— such, for instance, as would be involved in the mere dropping of the clause which excludes Irish Members from Westminster, or in the general assertion of the final authority of the Parlia- ment and Government in London over the Parliament and Government in Dublin.
Now, the danger before us is very serious. Mr. Trevelyan, in his speech of Tuesday,—a speech with a very great part of which, of course, we agree,—seems to us to have gone a long way towards confusing the issue when he said, first, that "the action of the Prime Minister makes it necessary to give more, and much more, than was thought wise and safe six months ago ;" when he said, next, that the Bill could "very easily be put into a shape in which he could vote for it ;" and when he finally explained this last remark by saying that if the Government would only keep their control on "law and order" in Ireland, an immense boon in the direction contemplated by this Bill might still be accorded to Ireland. Now, by all these con- cessions we fear that Mr. Trevelyan'e speech tends most seriously to confuse the issue to be placed before the country. We utterly deny that the Prime Minister's action has rendered it necessary "to give more, and much more, than was thought wise and safe six months ago." The Prime Minister's action has not been endorsed by the people of Great Britain. If it be so endorsed, then, and then only, we shall accept Mr. Trevelyan's statement ; but not before. The very issue to be presented to the British people is whether they do or do not intend to abandon the accepted policy of the Land Acts,—that is, the policy of governing Ireland according to Irish ideas, so far as those ideas can be brought home to the British people, but governing it from the centre of the United Kingdom, and not from the local centre. Abandon that principle so far as regards all matters of general policy, and, in our opinion, the struggle is over. In that case, we would concede not only Mr. Gladstone's Bill but a great deal more,—the nearer to Separation in principle, the better. Why should we impose a temporary Customs Union on Ireland, if we had made up our minds to let Ireland have autonomy in the larger sense ? If the Colonial tie is to be the only one,—the tie which can always be dissolved at the good pleasure of either party,—let it be the Colonial tie in everything, and let Ireland feel that she, like Australia, may go when she pleases, and that if she remains, it is by her own will alone. That is, to our minds, we do not say the true meaning of Mr. Gladstone's Bill,—for we know that he does not so mean it,—but the true development which his concession ought to take ; and far from thinking it the worst solution possible, we think it a vast deal better than any of the half-and-half measures. Again, when Mr. Trevelyan intimates that by simply maintaining the authority of the central government over "law and order" in Ireland, he maintains the only principle for which we ought strenuously to contend, he seems to us to darken counsel. Even at present we nominally maintain the authority of the central Govern- ment over "law and order" in Ireland, only we do not enforce it, but let the National League enforce their own view of what law and order ought to be. Should we be in a better or in a worse position for superseding the National League, if we had established in Dublin a Legislature which really represented that League ? It seems to us most unwise not to open our eyes to the plain facts of the case. If we are to give "more, and much more, than was considered wise and safe six months ago," let us consent to Mr. Gladstone's proposals at once, and rather enlarge than contract them, leaving out the irritating elements of the "treaty," and making the Irish feel that they are really to be masters in their own house.
But what we hope to see is a very different result. We hope to see Parliament asserting that, far from being committed to
Mr. Gladstone's proposal, it rejects the principle of that pro-
posal; that it will not break up the Legislature and Govern- ment of these islands, even to gratify the wish of the Irish people ; that the most it can do, or would desire to do, is to concede to temperate Irish opinion expressed at Westminster as much as the wisest Scotchmen and the wisest Englishmen claim for temperate Scotch opinion and English opinion there expressed. Let us open our eyes to the true issue. It is Unity which is at stake. If we break the tie between Great Britain and Ireland, we had better do it avowedly with our eyes open. If we refuse to break it, as we trust we shall, we had better let the Irish people see plainly that on this point the British democracy has a will of its own, which is not likely to be subdued.
Previous page
