The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-05-04
THE HOME-RULE BILL.

THE HOME-RULE BILL
Gladstone Argues in Its Favor, but Is Silent
Concerning the Land Bill.
LONDON, May 3.-Mr. Gladstone in mani
that his great age has prevented his taking part
in the speeches Of the Easter recess and has
obliged him to reserve his limited powers for the
House of Commons, and for that reason he uses
his pen instead of his voice. Continuing, he
says:
'Never have I 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 authori-
ties In the British colonies, and in America,
from capitals such as Washington, Boston and
Quebec from remote districts lying beyond the
reach OF ordinary poitica! excitement, 1 have
received conclusive assurances that kindred peo-
pies regard with warm fraternal sympathy the
attempt to solve the troubled relations between
Ireland and England, which exhibit the only
great failure Of political genius to solve.
"You must not be discouraged IT, in the upper
ranks of society at home, you hear variety Of
discordant notes-discordant alike from our
policy and from one another. Gentlemen, you
have before you Cabinet determined in its
purpose, and with an intelligent plan of its own.
see very little else in the political arena either
determined or Ineligible. will now proceed
to speak of the state OF things within and with
out Parliament and the nature and import of
the next great step to be taken for the progress
of my measure. l speak now of the home-rule
bill, and leave the land purchass bill to stand
the declaration already made, adding only an
expression of regret that while the sands are
running fsom the hour-glass the Irish landlords
proposal framed in spirit of the utmost allow
able regard for their apprehensions. / do not
underestimate the grave Importance of differ
ences Of opinion among Liberals. Some are in
cllned 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 I'm
perative dictates of truth and reason. will say
nothing Of the motives which determined
US to confront the risk Of such part
the lessons which history supplies It Is
not the first time In the history of
Liberalism, that section of the Liberals, under
chiefs of distinction and ability, have dissented
from the general view Of the party, to the de-
light, and. doubtless, the advantage Of the
Tories. There was an illustrious secession pre-
vious to the war with Bonaparte. Theirs was
similar secession when it was proposed to discs
tablish the Irish Church. But, eventually, in
in both cases. it was proved that in principle the
party was right, and the secession wrong. Com
pairing these with the present secession, it is i'm
possible not to be struck with q vital difference.
In each previous secession the dissentients
agreed upon an active, substantial policy. 1t Is
not SO now Some are In favor of unlimited CO.
ercion, others Of moderated doses; while few
oppose coercion altogether. On the other 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 a
indeed. go beyond the proposition of the govern
ment, and actually recommend federation Some
alter the proposals which they would recommend
with every new speech. All this Is q proof, not
of the weakness Of the men, but of the helpless
ness of their cause We have, at least, the ad-
vantage of one voice. The secession, however
estimable it may be otherwise, is a perfect babel
on Irish policy. It 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 hundred conflicting rem
edieS, or else no remedies at ALL These re-
marks are as applicable to the Tories as they are
to the Liberals The opponents to the govern
ment measure make remarkable omission In
their speeches. In each, whether suggestive or
critical, they fail to express confidence in the
permanent success 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 couces-
sion Of home rule. If this is so, the real ques-
ton is not the triumph of Irish autonomy, but
tn the length and character of the struggle.
Give freely They. by acts, if not words
say. Let US only give what we can no longer
withhold We say. Give now, while the posi-
ton Of the kingdom in the affairs Of the world
is free and strong They prefer to wait for a
period Of national difficulty, that we may yield
to the Irish demand in terror, as we did in the
war of 1778 as we did to the demands of the vol
unteers in 1882 as we did to Bonaparte in 1913 and
as we did in the civil war in 1929. We say, Act
Uh au I'D If nd Ia
rules in Irish counsels; when, by the willing
concurrence Of all eides, 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 q matter between brothers,
as matter of justice and reason. They renew
a tale, alasl too often told, whose prologue Is
denial, with evaporation and resentment, whose
epilogue is surrender, without conditions and
without honor.
Now, however, a new terror Is brought upon
the stage-the terror of homo rule for Scotland,
and, some add, for Wales. This suggestion does
not alarm me. Only give US little time to look
at the question In the order of merit / am not
sorry that Scotland and Wales have been named,
because all serious naming Of them serves to help
our movement in behalf of Ireland. can draw
no vital distinction of right between the case Of
Ireland and the other cases, but there are many
distinctions of circumstances. For many years
i hoSo uOpcu ~ mlSub % lOuuO prdCtlC6uAo w
apply decentralizing processes. even, perhaps,
to portions of different conditions. Each case
which will naturally require differences Of treat
ment will remain subject to the primary imperial
obligations. l believe that the standard and
measure Of good government in Scotland and
Wales will be eventually determined by public
opinion in Scotland and Wales. This say with
out painful disparaginR Of the circumstances
OF this controversy with which we are threat
ened In the case of Ireland, whose woeful
history for centuries emboldens some Of Us to
treat her as if she had but limited share in
the great inheritance of human right; none at
all in ordinary privileges of immunity. But this
is in bulk and constituent parts the same. though
now enriched at our cost with valuable con-
tingent of recruits that has fought In every po.
iticai battle of the last sixty years and been &C.
feated. We have before this had great contro-
versies on free trade free navigation, public ed
ucation, religious equality and the extension of
the franchise On these and other great issues