Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1886-05-12

a manifesto to his Midlothian constit-
uents, explains that his great age has
prevented his taking part IN the
speeches of the Easter recess and he's
obliged him to reserve his limited
powers for the House OF Commons,
and for that reason he uses his pen in
stead of his voice. Continuing, he
says:
Never have / known an occasion when a
parliamentary event so rang throughout
the world as the introduction OF the Home
Rule BILL From public meetings, from the
highest authorities in the British colonies
and in America, from capitals such as
Washington, Boston and Quebec, from re-
mote districts lying beyond the reach
of ordinary political excitement, L
have received conclusive assurances
that kindred people regard with
warm fraternal sympathy the attempt to
settle once for all the troubled relations be-
tween England and Ireland which exhibit
the only great failure of the political genius
of our race to confront a master difficulty
and to obtain in reasonable degree the
main ends of civilized life.
You must not be discouraged If, in the
upper ranks of society at home, you hear
a variety Of discordant -discordant
6r.
Gentlemen, you have before you cabinet
determined in it's purpose, and with an In
tellgible plan of it's own. 1 see very little
else in the political arena, either determined
or Ineligible. | will now proceed to speak
of the state OF things within and without
Parliament, and the nature and import OF
the next great step to be taken for the
progress of my measure. | speak now of
tho Pulo nd lea the
chase bill to stand on the declaration al
ready made, adding only ans express
sion of regret to find that while
the sands are running from the hour
glass the Irish landlords have given no indi-
cation of desire to accept the proposal
framed in a spirit of the most allowable re-
gard for their apprehensions aud interest.
I do not underestimate the grave i'm
portance of differences Of opinion among
Liberals Some are inclined to rule the
whole question against US by authority.
They say: "Surely such number OF able,
consistent even extreme Liberals would
not have seeded except in obedience to the
imperative dictates OF truth and reason"
will say nothing OF the motives which de-
termined US
TO CONFRONT THE RISK
of such a parting. | earnestly recommend
a reference to the lessons which history
supplies. 1t is not the first time in the his
tory of Liberalism that a section OF the
Liberals under chiefs OF distinction and
ability have dissented from the general
view of the party to the delight, and doubt
less the advantage of the Tories. There
was an illustrious secession previous to
the war with Bonaparte. There was
q similar secession when it was
proposed to dsestablish the Irish Church.
But eventually in both cases it was
proved that in principle the party was
right and the secession wrong. Comparing
these with the present secession it is impos-
sible not to be struck with vital differ
ence. In each previous secession the dis
sentients agreed upon an active, substan-
tial policy. 1t is not SO now. Some are in
favor of unlimited coercion; others OF mod
Grated doses; while a few oppose coercion
altogether. On the ether side some oppose
local government, some would give it to
the counties, some to the provinces. Some
again would give an administrative center
with legislative prerogatives, while some
propose legislative center without eXecu-
tive power. Some indeed go beyond the
proposition of the government and actu-
ally recommend federation. Some alter
the proposals which they would recon-
mend with every new speech. All this is q
proof not of the weakness OF the men, but
of the helplessness of their cause. We
have at least the advantage of one voice.
The secession, however estimable it may be
otherwise, is a perfect Babel on Irish policy.
1t is admitted on all hands that social
order is the first of all political aims. To
secure this in Ireland the Liberals who are
in secession offer a hundred conflicting
remedies, or else no remedies at all. These
remarks are as applicable to the Tories as
they are to the Liberals. The opponents
to the governments measure may make
remarkable omission in their speeches. In
each, whether suggestive or critical, they
fail to express confidence in the permanent
ssuccess of their opposition. To live from
hand to mouth seems to be the height of
their ambition, while they suspect
what we all know, that the
strife can only end in the concession
of Home Rule. If this is SO, the real ques-
ton is not the triumph of Irish autonomy,
but the length and character of the strug-
gle. Therefore we want to shorten,
they to prolong the struggle. We
say, Give freely" They, by acts
if not words, say, Let US only give what
now, while the position of the kingdom in
the affairs of the world is free and strong"
They prefer to wait for period OF national
difficulty that we may yield to the Irish de-
mand in terror, as we did in the war of
177S, as we did to the demands of the vol
unteers in 1882, as we did to Bonaperte in
1898, and as we did in the civil war in
1929.
WE SAY, "AcT NOW,
when moderation of thought and language
rules in Irish counsels, when by the willing
concurrence of all sides every arrangement
for the reservation of imperial prerogatives
can be made complete and absolute"
They would postpone till an hour comes
when the demands may be larger and the
means of resistance less. We say, Deal as
with a matter between brothers. matter
between brothers. matter of Justice and
reason" They renew tale, alas, too often
told whose prologue is denial with exasper-
alton and resentment; whose epilogue is
surrender without conditions and without
thanks.
Now, however, new terror is brought
upon the stage, the terror OF Home Rule
for Scotland, and, some add, of Wales.
This suggestion does not alarm me. Only
give us little time to look at this ques-
ton in it's order OF merit. l am not sorry
that Scotland and Wales have been mans d,
because all serious naming of them serves
to help our movement in behalf of Ireland.