The record-union., 1893-02-14
sneclnl 70 tne RrcoRp-UN1ox.

Special 10 the RECoRD-UNIoS.
LONDON, Feb. 13.-Gladstone slept well
last night and awoke refreshed, antici-
pating with pleasure the exertion OF the
day in connection with the debate on the
home rule bill. From early morning the
scene around the palace yard at Vest
minister was of the most animated de-
scription. Crowds were assembling 10
witness the arrival of the members. AT
noon the inner lobby was packed with
members and the approaches were
crowded. When the doors were opened
there was disorderly rush for seats, the
members shouting and struggling like a
mob of excursionists. The veteran MEM
Der, Caleb Wright, was borne down,
trampled on, and was with difficulty res
cued.
Gladstone entered the House at $3.50,
and was greeted by prolonged and en-
thusiastic cheers by the Liberal and Irish
members. Quarter of an hour later,
when he rose to introduce the home rule
bill, there was another demonstration,
lasting several minutes.
Gladstone spoke as follows, in clear,
strong and resonant voice:
81 may, without improperly. remind
the House that those voices which have
usually pleaded the cause of Irish self
government in Irish affairs have within
these walls, during the last seven years,
been almost entirely mute. L return,
therefore, to the period of 1886, when a
proposition of this kind was submitted
on the part of the Government of that
day, and 1 beg to remind the House OF
the position then taken by all the pro-
moters of these measures. We said we
had arrived at point in our transactions
with Ireland where the roads parted.
You have we said, 'to choose one or the
other.' One is the way of Irish autono-
my, according to the conceptions l have
just referred to; the other is the way OF
coercion. That is our contention. 1t
will be within the recollection of the
House how that contention was most
stoutly and largely denied. 1t was said
over and over again by many members OF
the opposition, we are not coercionists;
we 40 not adopt that alternative, and
neither can we adopt it, Ministerial
cheers.1 That assertion of theirs was I'M
doubleday sustained by the proposals,
especially from the dissentient Liberals,
OF various plans of dealing with Irish
affairs.
"Those plans, though they fell entirely
short in the principle and in the scope OF
Irish self-government, yet were OF no
trivial or mean importance. They went
far beyond what had hitherto been usu-
ally proposed in the way oflocal seh-gov-
eminent for Ireland.
well, what has been the result of the
dilemma. as then put forward on this
side OF the House and repealed by the
other side? Has our contention that the
choice lay between autonomy and CO.
ercion been justified or not? Liberal
cheers.l What has become of each and
all those important schemes for giving
Ireland seli-government in the provinces
and giving her even a central establish
ment in Dublin with limited powers ?
All have vanished into thin air, but the
reality remains. The roads were still
there, autonomy or coercion. The choice
lay between them, and the choice made
was to repel autonomy and embrace
coercion.
you cannot always follow coercion in
an absolutely uniform method. For the
first time coercion was imposed on Ire
land in the shape of permanent law ad-
ded to the statute book. This state Of
things constituted an offending against
harmony and the traditions Of self-gov-
eminent. 1t was a distinct and violent
breach of promise on the faith of which
union was obtained. That permanent
system of repression inflicted upon the
country state of things which could moi
continue TO exist. 1t was impossible tc
bring the inhabitants of the country un.
der coercion into sympathy with the
coercion power"
Gladstone then proceeded to dilate al
length upon the circumstances under
which the Act of Union passed, the pro.
viso of equality in the laws and CONNER.
cial equality under which the union was
effected. ut was then prophesied con.
fidently," he said, that Irishmen would
take their places in the Cabinet of the
United Kingdom. But it has been my
honored destiny 10 sit In Cabinets with
no less than sixty or seventy statesmen
of whom only one, the Duke of Yelling
ton, was an freshman, while Castlereagh
was the only other Irishman who had sat
in the Cabinet since the union. Pit
promised equal laws when the union was
formed, but the broken promises made tc
Ireland were unhappily written in indel.
ible characters in the history of the coun-
try.
Coming to 1882, when the resurrection
OF the people began, down to 1889, IRELAND
could present only small minority il
favor of restoring TO her something in the
nature of constitutional rights and prac.
teal seli-government. 1t is to me aston
ishing so little weight is attached BY
many to the fact that before lS86-beiort
1885, indeed-the Irish wishes of self
government were represented only by {
small minority. Since 1880, when the
wide extension of the franchise was pro.
tected by the secret ballot, Ireland's posi-
ton has been improved in Parliament
In 1856 there We're eighty-five National
lists, or more than five-eighths. [Cheers.
They have been reduced from eighty-fivt
TO eighty under circumstances somewhat
peculiar L"Hearl hearr'l, and, mus
frankly own, to myself, among others. fol-
reasons totally and absolutely unintelli.
gible. loud cheers.]
LET us look at the state of the case as
it now stands. There are but eighty
out OF one hundred; that is to say, The