The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1894-03-20
Lord Rosebery Explains.

Lord Rosebery Explains.
The greater part OF the speech made by
Lord RosEBERY at Edinburgh. was devoted
to dsavowal OF the meaning universally
attached to his speech In the House OF
Lords. 1t Is unfortunate. to say the least.
that Prime Minister'S first public utter
ance should have provoked q mutiny on the
part Of his own followers. Moreover. when
we compare what he said at Edinburgh with
his statement previously made at West
minister, we cannot see that the explanation
explains anything. and we are forced to in
fer that the satisfaction professed by the
McCarthyites Is due to private assurances
that Lord RosRBERY has profited by the
sharp lesson given to hlm-he narrowly es-
capped being known as the One-day Minis
ter-and that he will hereafter recognize
the absolute necessity Of keeping faith. both
in word and deed. with the Irish National
lists. We also infer that his failure in tho
speech at Edinburgh, as well as In his adj
dress to the Liberal leaders on March H. and
in the Queens speech. to promise q reintro-
duction Of home rule either by bill or reso-
luton at an autumn session this year or in
the spring OF 1895. must have been sane
toned by the McCarthyites on the reason
able ground that dissolution of Parlia-
ment during the summer Is expected.
We are unable to understand the asser-
ton made by Lord Rosemary at Edinburgh.
that he did not for q moment believe that
the Liberal or Irish party misinterpreted
his remarks lin the House Of Lordsl: there
fore he concluded that the misinterpreta-
ton emanated from the Unionist party"
As a matter Of fact, not q single Unionist
was included among the 147 members OF
the House Of Commons who came within a
hairs breadth Of driving the newly Matched
Prime Minister from Office by lacking o
hostile amendment to the address In reply to
the Queens speech. The 147 members who
combined to rebuke the obvious meaning Of
the reference to home rule made by Lord
RosEBERY in the upper House. were about
evenly divided between British Liberals
and Irish Nationalists. and must have COM
prised all Of the McCarthyltes. What the
new Premier had been understood to say
was that home rule would never be con-
coded to Ireland until 1t had enlisted In its
favor o majority of the members OF the
House OF Commons from England proper:
and that the conversion Of England from
disapproval to approval could be brought
about only by the spectacle of peace and
order maintained by Irishmen at home.
He did not say how many years this spec
tacle would have to be continued. or whether
during the interval the agitation for homo
rule would be kept up or suspended.
1t Is certain that this statement. In its
plain. obvious Significance. could not have
been accepted by any Irish Nationalist
without the grossest betrayal OF his con-
stituents. For they and Mr.. GLADSTONE
have always held-and no other view OF
the British Constitution Is tenable that
they needed to convert to the home rule
principle, not a majority Of the members
OF Parliament from England proper. but a
majority OF the members from the whole
OF the United Kingdom. They have also
held that the failure to convert a majority
OF the members from England proper would
not Justify the House OF Lords In rejecting
q Home Rule bill passed by the Commons.
but that such rejection. II persisted In.
would justify the abolition or drastic trans
formation OF the upper House.
Now let US see how Lord RosEBERY en-
deayored to reconcile the position OF the
Irish Nationalist and Mr.. GLADSTONE with
the words uttered by him In the House of
Lords. He says that +" II he had meant that
an English majority Is necessary to the
passing OF home rule. he would have been
uttering an absurdity." Lord RosEBERY
may now call the statement an absurd
ity-and 1t is well for him that he ap-
plies to 1t that term-but he knew when
he made it in the upper House that the
Unionists would not deem it absurd. for a
like assertion had been repeatedly made by
the party comprising nine-tenths OF the
Lords and majority OF the Commons from
England proper. Precisely what he did
mean. Lord RosEBERY declares. was that
I'VE must carry conviction to the heart OF
England" but he hastens to add that
these words "were a truism. a platitude, in
the sense In which uttered them" We
think that Irish patriots can AFFORD to agree
with him on this point. inasmueh as he ex-
plains that by carrying conviction TO the
heart OF England" he does not mean elect
ing a majority Of the members from Eng
land proper. On the contrary. he would be
satisfied. he says, that the process OF carry
ing conviction had gone far enough. II from
England proper there were only majority
OF As against him. The present majority
against him from England proper Is only
90. so that. sifted down. all Lord RosEBERY
meant 70 say was that he would like. II pos
sible. to secure a couple Of dozen more votes
In the Commons at the next election.
The rude lesson administered to Lord
RosEBERY by the Radicals and National
lists, when they beat his Government on the
amendment 10 the address. can alone ex-
plain the humilisting exhibition made at
Edinburgh. What. indeed. can be more hu-
initiating than the admission by Prime
Minister that his arst public uttsEGnOs on