New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-06-28
HOME RULE COMPLICATIONS.
MR. GLADSTONE'S OFFER TO HELP IhE
SALISBURY GOVERNMENT.
A LETTER FROM ARTHUR JAMES BALFouR ON THE
supJECr-MsANrSG OF THE REJECTION
OF THE PREMIER's PRoPOsALs-DE-
CEIVED BY TIE IUKIES'
rBY CABLE TO THE TRIBUSE.l


Copuriclt; 1856, North American Cdole NsTf Co.
Joxrnv June 27-ln this weeks Truth Mr..
fahouchere intmates that Mr. Gladstone endeav-
ored through Arthur Bafour, president OF the
Local Government Board under the Tory regime
and nephew of Lord Salisbury, to give the Torres
an opportunity Of carrying ont polcy OF iricnd-
shlp TO Ireland. The following correspondence
shows how far this intimatlon is consistent WIN
MIR. Bafours recollectons Mr. Balfour Is the
close sociate of Lord Randolph Churchil
the most trusted relative of Lord Salisbury, ana Is
said to be highly esteemed by Mr.. Gladstone MINI
self. The Premier, in a letter about the Duke OF
Westminster published on Friday, stated that he
, did make known to Lord Salisbury his desire TO
support him if he would introduce comprehen-
sive measure for the relief of Ireland. The Amerl-
can who furnishes the correspondence says there Is
no doubt that written evidence exists 10 sho"
that Mr. Gladstone must have been grossly de-
ceiyed by somebody If ne believes that his Home
pu,e views were ever seen and passed upon bv
Lord Salisbury before he formulated them pub
Icly himself On Wednesday last an American
friend of Mr. Balfour now III London, wrote to him
as follows:
DEAR MIR BALFoUR: Mr. Labouchere plainly inti-
mates In Truth that while member OF Lord SALISBURY
Cahet YOU laid before your colleagues at the request
OF Mr. Gladstone. propositions promising Mr.. Eiao-
atones bipartisan support to measures Tor the selo
ment OF the rish question. and that IT was upon the
rejection by your OF these overtures that
Mr. Gladstone felt himself bound to press his own Home
Rule scheme May ask you If this Is correoIi
To this letter Mr. Balfour replied:
DEAR SIR Stated is in your note sh oud say the
sssertion ia misleading. On the 2On or December
1855 Mr. Gladstone wrote Inc letter In when ne eH-
pressed desire that the Irish question shouo DC ue'
with by the then Government and intimating that Ill
,b.t se his wish would to treat any proposal we
might make in the spirit in which he had treated
onr action IN Afghauistsn and the Balkan Peninsula
reserying to himself however all necessary freeoo.
There was nothing that latter to indicate what par
tcular scheme he was prepared to support ana inc
words used by him, II taken by themselves anu
without the commentary supplied py MI heroer'
to Gladstone's lndiscretions. would have covered
. policy OF Coercion )ust as well as d poiioJ u ~
Rule. .
n shond be recoected that the only indications puo'
bclv yiyen of Mr. Gladstones Irish policy at that tme
acre contained In his Midlothian speeches. ana that IN
the Of these speeches he TOOK OCCASION " a ~
.onntry 10 give him all overwhelming Liberal majority
.xnresslv IN order that might himself have free
hand In de ng the Irish problem III s curious W
note that while one OF the accusations haue
AGAINST the Conservative party is that Tor
m. sake OF Office they prepared TO
with the Parnetes and to take up the cry
of Home Rule themselves, their unhesitatng reJecuon
OF the overtures made by Mr. Gladstone. cohciuS'eiy
r., ves that office to held the tenure OF carrying
ont the Irish pocy whatever 1t may have been hiD'ed
at by Mr. Gladstone had attractions for Them one
would also ike to know why Mr.. GLADSTONE II DC hau
then made up his mind in favor OF Home kule "u ho'
boldly that issue on the Queens speech anu u
the Government out oil it II he could rather than
snatch q, a division on a subordinate question with
which Lord sasbury's Government were even aFeaO'
nledced 20 deal.