The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1887-10-15 00:00:00

MZ. CHAMBERLAIN AND THE BELFAbT
UNIONISTS.

Mr. Chamberlain arrived in Belfast at noon on
Tuesday, after being entertained at Larne. At the
station he was very warmly greeted by a large
gathering, and some enthusiasm was manifested on
his journey through the city, the horses being taken
from his carriage, which was dragged a long distance.
There were some hostile demonstrations by workmen;
but the evidences of welcome largely preponderated.
Addressing the crowd, Mr. Chamberlain said he re-
cognised their welcome as a mark of their sense of
the importance of the principles which he had endea-
voured to maintain. The Liberal Unionists and the
Conservative party had saved the Union, and by so
doing had saved Great Britain from injury, and Ire-
land from ruin and disaster. It seemed possible that
the great issue would once more have to be faced ;
but he believed it would be found impossible to force
upon Ulster a Government which she distrusted and
detested.
In the evening Mr. Chamberlain was entertained at
a banquet in the Ulster Hall. Replying to the prin-
cipal toast, he said that, while desiring to proceed
with Liberal measures of reform, he feared it was
impossible to bridge over the gulf between the Sepa-
ratists and Unionists. He repudiated the suggestion
that he had come to Ulster to revive religious feuds,
and explained that his main object was to direct public
attention to the claims and position of the minority in
Ireland. Of all the curious developments which have
been brought about by the introduction of the Home
Rule Bill there is none, remarked the right hon.
gentleman, to my mind so surprising—l would even
say so unnatural—as .the neglect, the apathy, and
ignorance which a large portion of the Liberal
party in England and Scotland have shown as
to the interests and rights, the just and proper
claims of their co-religionists and fellow countrymen.
Let us just look at the simple facts of the case. Ire-
land has a population of about 5,000,000. Of that
number three, or it 'maybe three and a half millions,
desire a greatexpeflirient which is strenuously resisted •
by the remainder, but this minority of one and a
half or two millions te not an ordinary minority, it is
a minority which includes almost all the cultivated
intelligence of the country. It includes the greater
part of its enterprise and a large proportion of its"
wealth, it embraCes almost to a man the whole of the
Protestant' population; it includes every one of
Scottish or English birth and descent, and it is con-
nected, therefore, by ties of race, and religion, and
sympathy with the greater nation of which he is proud
to form. part. It is loyal and lea abiding, it boasts of
its share4n, the history of the United Kingdom, every
page of whose appals has 'been illustrated by the
valour and genius of your citizens. I am not going
to 1 ursue the comparison. It would be invidious to
contrast the composition and character of the majority
—(laughter)—but I ask myself how comes it that a
minority so important irLits numbers, so influential,
by its character entitled to so much respect for
the nature and character of its claims, can actually
be put aside and treated as of no account in the
discussion of proposals by which. it is sought to
transfer its allegiance to a domination which it
Ins good reason to dread and distrust, while the
noisy claims of a majority—a bare majority--ere
suffered to pass as the only true voice of Ireland.
I think I can find one reason which may explain,
although I do not say it justifies, this disproportion
in the public estimate between the respective claims
of loyalty and sedition. Loyalty in the House of
Commons—lrish loyalty—is represented only by 17
votes, while sedition enjoys a majority of 86 votes.
Even in Ulster, even in the -province in which I am
speaking, out of 33 members the Loyalists can secure
'only 16—a majority of one is counted on the side of
the Parnellite or Nationalist party. • -Now, }think
that it is possible under these, circumstances that
careless observers may argue from such a predominant
majority in the House of Commons that there is only i
an insignificant minority in the country, and that is
a matter of very great importance. I have
been following an illustrious example, and I
have been pursuing some studies in the science of
political meteorology, (Laughter.) I have been in-
vestigating the returns at elections, and certainly I
have come to conclusions which go far to modify
the result of a cursory inspection of the returns.
I find in the first place that in Ulster in 1586 26
seats were contested, with the result that 13 Par-
nellites and 13 Loyalists were returned,' but that the
votes giyen for the Parnellites were 73.000, while the
votes given for the 13 Unionists numbered 89,000, so
that with- the majority of Unionists of 20 Per cent.
there was an aclual tie in the result of the elections.
Then I find that the total electorate of Ulster
averages 8084 electors for each of its 33 seats, hut the
average electorate for the- rest of Ireland averages
only, 6987—in other woeds, the Nationalist sup-
porters in the South of Ireland are accounted as good
.ste.eigbt Loyalists in the province of Ulster. Let tiA go
a step further. If Ulster were treated as the 'rest of
. Ireland is, end if it. returned its members in proportiod
to the number of the voters, then Ulster would have 3,5
. members, of whom 21 would be Loyalists and 17 Par-
- nellites,.ipstead of the present arrangement, in which,.
with 4 majority of voters, there. is a minority of 4
Loyalist members. (Hear, heir.) I think, that re-
- quiriee a little reflection. and attention. I think there,:
might. be a suspicion of jerrymanderisin in these
•fig.tiiee, and at all events the loyal people of trster
'should not rest until there has been such a r4vision
4 redistribution of political power as /PAM- give
_ ,aeni their fair share and proportion d the returns to
Parliament. (Hear, hear.) Well, nlT"turn lo the
whole of
.Irelancl. I find in l€s, 70' .seats
lige contested 'by 'Par/lei ' and Loyalists.
I leave out of accOone . is' certain. number.
of seats -which were 'co steil • between •-Liberale
"and Conservatives, and seat contested by two Par-,
~. •
nellites—but taking t e 70. seats in- whichlhere was_
,ft -square fight bet*.en Unionists- ank•Pilaliste, I-.
find there were --6297,000* Pain-ellitesn,stifd 86,000
enioni.ts, or a Ant ,31 to 1, 'but', the numbers re-
turned were, 5, or 26 to L 1n.'1886,32 seats were.
"
contested, a d there were 90,000 .Parnellites and
I;,t
Bcs.oo Lo-Valists, or a slight - n2ajority Of Loyalists,
104 Ytt.:?'-fOr these seats the return. shows 19_ for
-tlia l',gtrnellites and 13 for the Loyalists; thal is to
-saYwa.majority of six seats went to the,-Parnellites,
,while.- the Loyalists bad 2000. niajority in' the
,4n In ber of voters. Lastly, in 'lBB5, the number
• of Parnellite votes polled was only half the number
of electors 'on the register of the veestituencies,
Yet five-sixths of the Parnellitee were. returned
,
to Owen I think'there is„considerable importanceto -be attached to those figures. ''You will remember
that Mr. Gladatone.. has himself told us agativ and
sgain that be wished to give ttp the whole of the:pro-
zramme uponewhich he had fought the' eleotion of
1885, and.tclitmdertake this vexed question of Home
Rule, from 4.L._ 'rid that 86, Paraellite members in
favour VP Home Rule . wire returned to the,..„Parlia-
proportion it wiitildleve badfrom,6o.l-or at gigst 65
/bent of I§B6. If 'that pa- rty.had only had it, proper

I arld
fate

• •

..1/4•0

z

MOMMNI