The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-04-07
RosEBERY AND HOME RULE.


There have been number of con-
ficting statements as to Lord Rose
bery's position on Home Rule for Ire
land, and especially about his speech
on the subject delivered in Edinburgh
As it is a question which is of great in
terest in this country. we here append
the full text of that speech which de-
tends his position and corrects some
mistakes in relation to it. Lord Rose
berry said:
The other day, on the first night of
the session. | had occasion to deal with
the Irish question. 1 thought that l
had dealt with it with absolute frank
ness and absolute perspicuity, and my
critics admit that l dealt with it with
almost too much perspicuity. But un-
fortunately, the Interpretation that
they put upon my words was not that
which l put upon them in my inten-
ton. What 1 said was that if we
wanted to carry home rule we must
carry conviction to the heart of Eng
land, and by those words l stand.
They are a truism, they are platitude
in the sense in which l uttered them;
but in the sense in which they nave
in which / as a Scotsman, should be
the first to repudiate. Are we really to
believe that in all the great measures
which affect the partnership which is
called the United Kingdom we are to
wait the predominant vote of Eng
land? We could never carry anything.
Mr.. Lecky will tell you in his his
tory-eXtremely impartial, at any rate,
as regards the party TO which we be-
| long-Mr. Lecky will tell you that the
first reform bill was carried by Irish
votes, while the first reform bill was
much greater upheaval of the con-
stitution than any Irish home rule bill!
| can possibly be; but it was carried by
Irish votes. We do not propose to sit
on the banks of the stream of time and
watch that stream pass by until it
shall run dry in an English majority
for the cause that we espouse. What
we mean to do is what we have been
doing. ever since the home rule bill was
introduced in 1886. We are trying to
bring conviction to the mind of the
partner in our partnership that has
the greatest population and the most
votes. That does not seem to me to
be an entirely unnatural proceeding.
My belief as regards the interpreted
ton that has been put upon my words
is that the London press knew l was a
Scotchman, and they endeaVored to
rub up their somewhat imperfect
knowledge of Scottish usages, and
they remembered that rectorial elee-
ton is decided not always by a ma
jority in each of the four nations com
prising the population of the univers-
ity; and putting two and two together
they came TO this conclusion, that
what Lord Rosebery means is this
that no great constitutional change
must be carried without a majority in
II, 8
Kingdom, and in that way, while we
have a majority of seventy against
home rule in England, we are safe
against any presentation of the meas
ure
l am obliged to point out some facts
by figures which l candidly acknowl-
edge l took from the Daily News this
morning as being more accurate than
those with which | provided myself
1 want you to understand from those
figures that the operation which / indi-
Gated Of bringing conviction to the Eng
lish conscience and the English mind
is one on which we have been engaged
ever since 1886. What was the majority
that was returned at the general cleo
ton of 1886 against home rule in Eng
land? The English constituencies. Dor
oughs, counties and universities in 1856
returned 126 home-rulers, against 339
unionists-a majority for the latter Of
213 That was the English majority we
had to knock down in 1886. In 1892
England returned 1S9 home-rulers and
266 unionists, showing conversion to
have proceeded the length of reducing
the anti-home-fule majority from 213
to 50. We propose to go on reducing
the majority; we believe that we shall
reduce it. l go a good deal further
than some of my timid critics on my
own side. l believe that-even if I had
said-which / did not say-that l de-
manded an English majority for home
rule, that English majority we shall
get / must point out that, if l had,
however, meant that an English ma
jority was necessary to the passing of
home rule. 1 should have been utter
| ing what is on the face of it an alb
surdity.
1 suppose that all our opponents will
concede that if to the next House of
Commons we brought a majority of 100
in favor of home rule, there would be
a majority which would bring convic-
ton to the minds of the House of Lords
itself. But, as matter of fact, if you
look at the figures you will find that
you might have a majority against you
in England of 50 against home rule and
yet have that very majority of 10o
which / have indicated in its favor. l
will give you the figures as they came