The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1892-06-26
TIE BRITISH CAMPAIGN.

The political campaign in Great Britain.
which has opened with Giadstone'S address
to the electors. promises TO be one of the
most exciting OF modern years. The issue
is the same as it was in 1866-decentraliZa-
ton against eentraliZation-but the question
is better understood now than 1t was then.
In 1886 Gladstone took the field in favor OF
self-goYernmeut for Ireland. on the ground
that the Interests of Ireland as, indeed,
those If the whole United KingdOm-de-
manded that each division Of the kingdom
should administer its own local affairs with
out interference from other divisions. The
Tories met him with the charge that his
policy led ultimately to disunion; that Irish
seIf-gOyernment in local affairs would lead
TO a demand for self-gOyernment in national
affairs and that the end would be that Ire
land would cut loose from the empire. This
view commended itself to the couple of mil
lion voters on when Gladstone had be-
slowed the franchise, and who had enjoyed
TO political education. They voted with the
Tories Oh the broad ground that they were
opposed to any policy which looked, how
ever remotely, 70 what we IN this country
would call secession.
Since 1885 the English constituencies have
gained light on the subject from the de-
bates in Parliament. and especially from
the speeches Of Gladstone, Harcourt and
Morley. Many Engisbmen are now per-
ceving that local independence is not in-
consistent with national authority. and that
the Irish may eject their own stipendary
magistrates and regulate their own land
tenures without necessarily aiming at DO
litical separation from the rest Of the en-
piTe. They are strengthened in this view
by observing that the home rule which is
demanded for Ireland IS also sought by
Scotland, Wales and England itself, and
that the question is really not political but
a mere controversy whether local affairs
would be better managed by local authority
than by the general Parliament of the en-
pire. Mr.. Gladstone evidently proposes to
rely on the argument that the mass Of bust
ness which now deyolyes on Parliament
through the absence of local legislatures is
more than it can transact. and that the
public interest suffers in consequence.
1t would be rash. however, to conclude
that a majority Of the 100000 British
voters will take this view Of the question.
An Englishman's attachment to the In
tegrity of the empire Is as strong as the
American devotion to the Union. Where
4
mote contingency endanger that integrity,
he is apt TO take the safe side and TO vote
NO" We can realize his feelings by reck-
oning how we would feel if some member
Of Congress should propose to amend the
constitution so as to enlarge the authority
Of the States at the expense Of the national
organization; we might scent a flavor of
secession in the scheme. and set our foot on
it IN consequence. Sooner or later. of
course, the absurdity Of a system under
which the construction Of bridge in Wales
or the terms Of lease in Ulster has to be
referred 10 tie General Parliament Of the
nation will become SO self-eyident that home
rule viii be demanded by ali parties; bat it
may take some time before her Msjesty's
subjects are educated up to this understand
ing Of the matter.
The evolution of government in Ireland
has always been delayed by the preciptate
action Of parties who took the lead of neces-
saTy reforms Daniel O'C0nnell might have
done much 20 better matters il he had not
hoisted the banner Of repeal. That united
Englishman and Scoehman against him.
for the simple reason that England could
not afford to let Ireland play the part which
Texas PLAYED toward Mexico O'Counell
retarded the settlement Of Irish wrongs by
at least a quarter Of a century. Parnell was
wiser. He disclaimed all desire for repeal,
but demanded local autonomy. Now that
the time approaches for the possible triumph
Of his policy. the Ulster manifesto, for
which Lord AbercoTn is largely responsi-
bic, throws everything into confusion again.