TOPICS OF THE DAY.
MR. GLADSTONE AT ABERDEEN.
MR. GLADSTONE has made a very good speech at Aber- deen,—which, however, so far as the most important part, that on Home Rule for Ireland, is concerned, would have been much better if made in Dublin, and made, of course, with the sort of modification which every great orator spontaneously introduces when he is actually addressing those with whom he has a controversy. It maybe partly the fault of Ireland which, as far as we know, has never invited Mr. Gladstone, and partly the fault of the Ministry, who have, we suppose, never made any occasion for a great opening of their minds to Ireland on the subject of their Irish policy, but it is undoubtedly a fault, that while Ireland has received political justice in the most-gener- ous manner at the hands of the present Ministry, there has been no kind of attempt to establish frank social rela- tions between the Government and that partly-neglected, partly-spoiled child of the United Kingdom. The Crown neglects Ireland, the Ministers avoid it, even Mr. Bright sticks to Scotland in his salmon-fishing ; and while Edinburgh, or Glasgow, or Aberdeen is always entertaining some great member of the Administration, Ireland never receives the compliment of a personal visit and a cordial explanation of the aims of that Administration which has made the reform of Irish grievances its first and greatest object. And it seems to us peculiarly unfortunate that when the Prime Minister takes occasion to explain,—and to explain so well,—what he thinks of the revived crotchet of Home Rule in Ireland, he should be speaking of Ireland instead of to her, and of course, therefore, —mild and reasonable as his criticism is,—should produce upon Ireland something of the disagreeable effect which we all feel when we hear that any of our friends have met together to deplore our errors behind our backs. Had the excellent speech on Home Rule made at Aberdeen been made in Dublin, it would inevitably have been couched in a tone of frank, respect- ful, and argumentative protest, rather than in that of kindly commiseration. We need not say which of the two would have the most healing effect on a country so sensitive to the slightest modifications of manner, the slightest inflexion of speech, the slightest change of moral intonation, as Ireland. Allowing for the unfortunate invidiousness of a political comparison between Ireland and Scotland, drawn in the latter country to the disadvantage of the former, it is impossible to speak too highly of the tone of Mr. Gladstone's comments on the assumption that his Irish policy has " failed," and on the demand for Home Rule by which it is now met. He said that while he could not admit that we had yet seen the fruits of the Government's recent Irish policy, he must deny all the same that its chief aim had been conciliation, since it had aimed simply at doing what we should be equally bound to have done • even if conciliation were altogether impossible, namely, the rendering to Ireland of simple justice. That justice once rendered, he thought the position of the Government and Parliament would be " invulnerable,"—that they would have a right to refuse to consider the deliberate breaking-up of the United Parliament, for reasons applying only, if applying at all, to one part of the king- dom, so long as they could bring proof that the first object of the United Parliament is to make a kingdom "united in heart as well as in law," and that no grievances which any part of the kingdom can produce will be regarded with indifference or jealousy by the Parliament of the whole. And Mr. Gladstone not only treated the demand for Irish Home Rule in the spirit of a Minister of Great Britain as well as Ireland,--of a minister who feels that this is not a demand which any one party to a Union has a right to wring from the others, so long as it is treated with equality, nay even in some respects,—in compensation for past oppres- sions,—with something more than equality,—but he spoke with that wise confidence and cheerfulness which will tell the whole Empire that he means exactly what he says :—" You would expect, when it is said that the Imperial Parliament is to be broken up, that at the very least a case should be made out showing there were great subjects of policy, and great demands neces- sary for the welfare of Ireland, which representatives of Ireland had united to ask, and which the representatives of England, Scotland, and Wales had united to refuse, There is no such grievance. There is nothing that Ireland has asked and which this country and this Parliament have refused. . . . What are inequalities nequalities of England and Ireland ? I declare that I know of none, except that certain taxes still remain which are levied on Englishmen and Scotchmen, and which are not levied on Irishmen, and likewise that there are certain pur- poses for which public money is freely and largely given in Ireland, and for which it is not given in England or Scot- land Can any sensible man, can any rational man suppose that at this time of day, in this condition of the world, we are going to disintegrate the great capital institu- tions of this country, for the purpose of making ourselves. ridiculous in the face of all mankind, and crippling any power we possess for bestowing benefits through legislation on the country to which we belong 1" That puts the resistance to the Irish cry on solid ground. The only claim Ireland could have to a dissolution of Parliamentary partnership would be the proof that the common Parliament overrides her wishes and, neglects her claims. The very contrary of this is true, and therefore the interests of the common whole will far outweigh the interests of the part which is discontented—not with the work of the United Parliament, but with its form. At the same time, so far from regretting what his Government has already done for Ireland, Mr. Gladstone regards it as the most substantial answer to the claim for' separate legislative institutions. The United Parliament does justice to Ireland,. often at the cost of great toil and trouble. Would an Irish Parliament do even as much ?
But though Mr. Gladstone's treatment of this no doubt very important subject is to the full as good as a sound view of the Irish agitation confided to a sympathizing Scotch audience could be expected to be, we could have wished something for the rest of his speech that we do not find. Mr. Gladstone is not the minister of a de- partment, but the minister who shapes the whole policy of the Government, and who, when he opens his mouth at all, should say what is most needful to gain the confidence of the whole United Kingdom, without too much regard to the par- ticular audience he may be addressing. He had occasion to point out to his Scotch hearers that many of the measures which have filled the hands of Parliament this Session were measures. not conceived in the interest of either England, or Scotland, or Ireland, but of the whole United Kingdom. He observed that the abolition of Purchase in the Army is a measure which touches alike all the Three Kingdoms. While he was. on that subject, why could he not have referred to the Autumn campaign as an important step at least towards making the Army a real working army, capable of fighting, if fighting should unfor- tunately be needed. And why could he not have added some- thing, which Lord Palmerston in his place would certainly have added, of the determination of the Government to follow that truest pacific policy which, while treating all foreign Govern-. meats with the utmost cordiality and courtesy, removes all danger of England's either suffering deliberate slights or falling into undignified panics, by making her thoroughly safe and strong,. even in these days of gigantic armies and international heats Mr. Gladstone cannot in his own soul question the wisdom of insuring England, even at a high rate, against the incalculable misfortune of being suddenly caught as unprepared as France. He cannot question that if we are to keep an Army and Navy at all, they ought to have some sort of proportion in both discipline and strength to the forces which neigh- bouring nations can bring into the field. He shows that he does not doubt either of these propositions, because his Govern- ment has acted on the assumption that they are true, Why cannot he take full credit for believing that upon which he acts ?• It would altogether alter his position as a British Prime Minister, if he would but show publicly that consideration for the self-respect and independence and dignity of the nation, on which in troubled times Englishmen count in their Prime Minister. Instead of this, he seems to take pleasure, as at Whitby, in making light of the very feeling which elicited the outcry for Army Reform, though his Government bowed to the demand. Mr. Gladstone wants but one thing to make him a great prime minister,—the consciousness of repre- senting the whole nation ;—not simply of directing its intelli- gence and guiding its actions, but giving some fit expression to its national character, whenever that character is strongly roused. It is this that he disregards. Yet no prime minister can ever have the full sympathy and confidence of the nation, without showing the capacity to interpret its feelings and to satisfy its legitimate self-respect.
Previous page
