LETTERS ON HOME RULE

BY JOHN BRIGHT,

THE PEOPLE’S TRIBUNE.

BIRMINGHAM : THE DAILY GAZETTE COMPANY, LIMITED. 1892. INTRODUCTION.

Death has robbed us of the man who above all others commanded the confidence of this country during the great political crisis of 1886. When Mr. Gladstone changed his whole attitude towards Irish Nationalism in order to obtain the support of Mr. Parnell and his followers, John Bright was one of the first to protest against the surrender of principle by the Liberal party. He had ever proved himself a generous friend to//the Irish people, had always held Mr. Gladstone in high esteem, and was one of his closest political associates. The whole country looked, therefore, with special anxiety for an indication of his views on the Home Rule Bill, and on the wild scheme of compulsory land purchase with which it was associated. He did not leave a doubt as to his opinion on either of the proposals, and his attitude exercised a profound influence upon the electorate when Mr. Gladstone, defeated in the House of Commons, appealed to the country for a mandate, which was absolutely refused. Had Mr. Bright been a younger man, his voice would have been raised against ‘‘the wild policy” which, to its lasting disgrace, had associated the Liberal party with “ the conspiracy half Irish and half American ” which was then and is now “ at open war with the Government of the Queen.” Compelled by physical weakness to lefrain from platform work, he proved his unimpaired mental vigour by issuing in rapid succession the letters collected in this pamphlet. They deal with every phase of the Irish controversy as it has never been dealt with by any other man. They form, as the editor of a collection published by theBirmingham Gazette Company in 1888 truly said, “ a statement of the case for the Union which for succinctness, precision, and patriotic force has no counterpart in Unionist literature.” They are a noble vindication of the course taken by Unionist Liberals, and a crushing censure of those who were willing to give up the unity of the three kingdoms in order to preserve the unity of a political party. “ I have not changed ” was Mr. Bright’s dignified answer to a critic in June, 1887 ; “ I have not changed” was the refrain of Mr. Chamberlain’s speech when asked to take the leadership of the Liberal Unionist party in the House of Commons in February, 1892. These letters reveal how “ others have changed,” and why consistency is offensive to them. They will suffice to show the thoughtful and fair-minded electors of this country how hollow and unwarranted are the gibes and sneers indulged in by Gladstonians at the expense of those Liberals who remain true to the Unionist principles which were held by the whole party, and, most strongly of all, by Mr. Gladstone himself, in 1885. If they do this, and if they also persuade some doubting electors who reverently cherish the memory of John Bright to take the fearless, patriotic course he pursued on the Home Rule question, their re-publication will not be in vain. “ The People s Tribune ” has passed away, but the counsel he freely gave to his countrymen remains for their guidance and encouragement in the great struggle which is impending. One word of thanks the Editor must express to all who have assisted him In making this collection of Mr. Bright’s letters on Home Rule as complete as possible. To give names would be invidious, and it is unnecessary, since all will be amply satisfied by the reflection that they have aided in preserving a series of letters which are not less an ornament to English literature than an invocation to loyalty and patriotism. Writing under date of February 23, 1888, from One Ash, Rochdale, Mr. Bright said :—“ I have had several suggestions that my letters should be published, and I am quite willing you should deal with them as you propose.I hope they may be sent into the house o f each, andvoter that they may be useful.” It is our most earnest wish that Mr. Bright’s hope may be realised j and if some critics are disposed to urge that the pamphlet is unworthy of the treasures it contains, we pray them to remember that our great aim has been to place it within the reach of all who within the next Iwelve months may be called upon to give a vote on the question of Home Rule. Birmingham. Feb., 1892. JOHN BRIGHT’S LETTERS ON HOME RULE.

I.—A ONE-MAN POLICY. war with you, and am sorrv to see it. They make no Mr. Bright addressed the following letter to a allowance for what they deem an error, even when member of the Council of the Central Division viewed in connection with many years of honest service. of Birmingham, who wrote the hon. gentleman In the future that which to them is an error may turn out to have been patriotism and wisdom. It is grievous on May 19th, 1886, urging him to do all in histo see with what bitterness Liberals can treat Liberals power to prevent the passing of the Irish Bills in whose fault is that they have consistently supported the the form which they then took principles which all Liberals accepted less than a year Reform Club, May 31st, 1836. af° ‘ Bonesty and capacity in a member are with some Dear Sir— . . . I think the Home Rule Bill of small value in comparison with the suppleness which should have been withdrawn before the second reading, permits or enables him to “ turn his back upon him self” and but for the fear of a dissolution, which decides th when a great political leader changes his mind and his votes of some scores of members, this would have been course. I am surprised that any real Liberal should be done. I hope the course I shall take will meet with the induced to oppose you. He cannot excel you in a faithful support of those I am permitted to represent. discharge of Parliamentary duty, and I think he should My sympathy with Ireland, north and south, compels rather admire than blame your steadfast adherence to me to condemn the proposed legislation. I believe the the policy on which you believed you were elected in united Parliament can be and will be more just to all November last. . .—Believe me, sincerely yours, classes in Ireland than any Parliament that can meet in J o h n B r ig h t . Dublin under the provisions of Mr. Gladstone’s bill. If Mr. Gladstone’s great authority were withdrawn from IV.—MR. BRIGHT AND MR. GLADSTONE. these bills, I doubt if twenty members outside the Irish party in the House of Commons would support them. Mr. Bright forwarded to the Times tha -The more I consider them the more I lament that they following letter, which he addressed to Mr. have been offered to the Parliament of the country — Gladstone :— Yours very truly, J o h n B r ig h t *. __ , , Bath, July 4, 1806. My dear Gladstone—I am sorry my spéeoh has so greatly irritated you. It has been as great a grief to me II.—ABJECT PARTISANSHIP. to speak as I have spoken as it can have been to you to Mr. W. S. Caine, M.P. for Barrow, received listen or to read. the following letter from Mr. Bright at the time You say it is a gross charge to say that you concealed your thoughts last November. Surely, when you urged that he was soliciting the suffrages of the electors the constituencies to send you a Liberal majoritv large of that place :— enough to make you independent of Mr. Parnell and his T» , r _ . One Ash, Roohdale, June 22nd, 1886. party, the Liberal party and the country understood you Dear Mr Caine—I see you are engaged in a fight at to ask for a majority to enable you to resist Mr. Parnell, Barrow. I much hope you will win. It is not pleasant not to make a complete surrender to him. to see bow unforgiving some of our heretofore Liberal { You object to my quotations about a conspiracy friends are if their representatives refuse to surrender “ marching through rapine to the break-up of the United Judgment and conscience to the demands or the sudden Kingdom,” and you s'ay there is now no such conspiracy changes of their political leader. The action of our against the payment of rent and the union of the ítÍL ? f 8°ci*tions « raPÜly engaged in making countries. I believe there is now such a conspiracy, and delegates of their members and in insisting on their that it is expecting and seeking its further success forgetting all principles if the interests of a party or the through your measure. leader of a party are supposed to be at stake. What You complain that I charge you with want of frank­ will be the vaiue of a party when its whole power is ness in regard to the Land Purchase Bill. You must laid at the disposal of a leader from whose authority no know that a large number of your supporters are utterly appeal is allowed ? At this moment it is notorious that opposed to the bill. If you tie the two bills together their difficulty in dealing with them will be much JXïïhÎn erB *■ t H?Use of 0°mmons have voted t h JTri.hG™ mmTtn* w]*0 in private have condemned increased, and their liberty greatly fettered. I think the Ir sh bills. Is it wise for a Liberal elector or oon your friends and your opponents and the country have a stituency to prefer such a member, abject at the feet of right to know your intentions on so great a matter when a Minister, to one who takes the course dictated by his you are asking them to elect a Parliament in your conscience and his sense of honour T favour. Your language seems to me rather a puzzle But we need not despair. The ninety-three who voted than an explanation, and that of your colleagues, though In the majority have done much to redeem the Liberals contradictory, is not much clearer. from the discredit of accepting a measure which the I have done what I could to keep out of controversy with you. I have not urged any man in Parliament or r c L ofwiiims, , r demDed- - 1 hope out of it to vote against you. I have abstained from Believe me, vIL.yours sincerely,1 7°U m your honest j 0HN B courseb ig h t . - speaking in public until I was in the face of my con­ stituents, who have returned me unopposed to the new Parliament ; and to them I was bound to explain my H I.— ERROR OR PATRIOTISM Î opinion of and my judgment on your Irish bills. I stand by what I have said, and shall be surprised if the forwarded following letter to new Parliament be more favourable to your Irish UnnS G r ? t er ??land8> W^° was contesting measures than the one you have thought it necessary to Burnley as a Liberal Unionist, in June, 1886 : —dissolve. Though I thus differ from you at this time and on this Deftr BylaaOs—I sçc some of your old friends arc at duestiOB. do not imagine that I oan ever cease to adiairo J o h n B r ig h t 's L e t t e r s o n H om e R u l e . your great qualities or to value the great services you something. Clubs aud political aesociations regard them- have rendered to your country.—I am, very sinoerely your*, J o h n B r ig h t . eXA8tÍDg to 8UPPort a P^ty, and they follow tSÎ 60 lon? as ne U the accepted and acting leader. They mainly support Mr. Gladstone on the Irish question ; a year ago they would have repudiated V. -1866 AND 1886. any candidate who wai in favour of a Dublin Parlia­ ment. They now charge the independent Liberals with The following letter from Mr. Bright was breaking up the Liberal party, which charge can only be received by a gentleman at Birmingham :— sustained en the principe that wheresoever the leader of One Ash, Rochdale, July 25, 1886. rnE?TP » wkole party is bound to follow him. Dear Sir—I have your note enclosing a copy of a This is a priuoipleI cannot adopt. . . . I hare not letter from Mr. Gladstone to Mr. Napier, late candi­ been able to march with the cluos and associations which date for Roxburghshire, in which he says that I shout for measures which little more than a year ato “ oon tended in the year 1866 for a Legislature in they would have condemned. We have not had yet an Infallible leader, and till he appear» upon the sceneI College Green.” The only foundation lor this state­ must preserve my own liberty of judgment. ment is, that I said the Irish farmers would have more direct influence on a Parliament in Dublin than on The Liberal party will not be destroyed. It will be one in Westminster, which is quite true. I don't give instructed, and may he more competent for the wuxk you the words I used, but I give the true sense of before i t I hope with you that wemay see bettor them ; aud they in no degree express the opinion jlmt times, but reunion will not oome until a eLange eetoes I was then, any more than I am now, in favour of a which I may hope for, hot of which at presentce* I Parliament iu Dublin. discover no signs. Smooth talk an platforms will i*4 bridge over the chasm which has been opened in oas If the farmers in Ireland can claim a Parliament in ranks. Dublin for their especial benefit, the people of Ulster may ask for one in Belfast, and the crofters In the Highlands of Scotland may demand one in Edinburgh or Inverness. It may be admitted that the nearer a VII.—MR. GLADSTONE LOST TO Parliament is to those it represents, the better it is likely to be for both Parliament and people. This u MODERATION. an argument everywhere for Home Rule and for any On the occasion of the Liberal Unionist Con­ number of Parliaments ; but it does not settle the right or wrong of any particular demand. I have ference iu London, on the 7th December, 1886, never expressed or held the opinion that a Parliament Mr. Bright addressed the following letter to tha in Dublin would be an advantage to the people of secretary :— Ireland. In the speech to the Cork Farmers’ Club, to Your letter has caused me some anxiety, and I wish I which doubtless Mr. Gladstone refers, I showed how could reply to it as you wish. You know I am against little force there was in the Irish representation from anything like a Parliament in Dublin, and more against the want of unity amongst its members—the half it, I suppose, than many or some of those who are acting sitting on one side of the House of Commons, and the with you. If present at the conference or banquet I half opposing them on the other side. If the Irish might be expected to say something, and might find members had been agreed upon any policy, they could myself in some difficulty. I fear to speak or even to have carried any measure that was reasonable and just write. The course taken by Mr. Gladstone in the House at Westminster. They could have dis­ close of the session has astonished me, and has given me established the Irish Church, and they could have passed great trouble. His speaking and writing, and especially the Land Acts. In the session of 1874 they combined, his reception of the Irish deputation, seem to me to at the command of the Irish Catholic bishops, and have driven him so far on a wrong course that we can threw out Mr. Gladstone’s University Bill aud destroyed have no hope of any more moderate policy from him. If his Government. There was no record of their having I had to speak what could I say ? I could only deplore combined, when I spoke in 1866, for anything wise and and condemn, and it would be impossible to avoid open­ good for their country. ing still more widely the breach which now exists W hat I said to the deputation from the Cork Farmer»’ between us, and which has given me so much pain. Club was in part an argument that may be used in At this moment his allies in Ireland—Messrs. Dillon, favour of Home Rule by those who are in favour of that O’Brien, and Co.—are driving matters to an extremity, constitutional change. It is an argument the weight and he and Mr. Parnell say not a word to arrest or to and effect of which must depend upon circumstances. lessen the calamity which I fear is impending. Mr. In the case of Ireland it seems to me to have little Parnell is, I believe, the proprietorof the organ United weight, for surely the concessions to, and the liberal Ireland, and that paper is the chief promoter of the and, I hope, the wise legislation for Ireland ky the social war into which ihe people are being driven. Mr. united Parliament, since the year 1866, are enough to Gladstone ïs leading the bulk of the liberal party in convince any reasonable man that the interests of the support of the men who are the authorsof the desperate United Kingdom may be left to the Parliament at West­ struggle which is now being waged between the owners minster. Our experience during the last twenty years and occupiers of land in Ireland. His voice is not heard is, to my mind, strong confirmation of the view I have on behalf of poaco and moderation. The Government always held on the Irish question. You will Bee from may be compelled to take measures of repression, and what I have written that my opinion on the question of liberal speakers in oonferenoes and on platforms are separate Parliaments in Great Britain and Ireland has pledging themselvea to their audiences to oppose every­ undergone no change.—f am, very truly yours, thing that has the semblance of what is called __ J o h n B r ig h t . “ coercion,” and every proposal for giving increased Mr. George Summer, 1, Richmond Road, strength to the Irish Executive. Birmingham. If I were forced to speak I should have to say some strong things, and I might not be of any real service. I could say nothing without attacking Mr. Gladstone. That I might do if I were sure of doing good, but I ass VI.—IDOLATRY IS NOT LIBERALISM. not sure of doing good, and I abstain from attaoking hins Replying to a Manchester correspondent inon account of my personal regard for him which cannot November, 1886, respecting the Liberal split, greatly diminish. I do not feel that I can oome to the conference, but I hope your meeting may be large and Mr. Bright wrote the following letter influential, that its effects maybe good on the country, I thank you for your very friendly letter. The Inci­ and that it may add strength to the Government as far dent about the bust is interesting and may teach usy as it maybe our duty to support it. J o h n B r ig h t ’s L e t t e r s o n JFTo m e R u l e . 6

VIII.—ON IRISH INDUSTRY. f í f ■Par.liamenfc of the fchree kingdoms at W estminster to The following letter from Mr. Bright was «nff ‘ C0DfPiraCy Wh°m SO much of the received by Mr. Robert Dennis, author ofpresent suffering and demoralisation of their unhappy “ Industrial Ireland ” :— country is due.—Yours truly, J o h n B b ig h t . Ope Ash, Rochdale, January 28, 1887. Dear Sir—I thank you for sending me yourvolume on “ Industrial Ireland." I have read it with much X.—REMEMBER THE TWO MILLION interest, and wish it could be read in every household in Irelaud. It is a deplorable thing that the men who LOYALISTS. are now supposed to represent Irishmen and Irish Mr. Bright, replying to a communication on tenants are never heard to speak a word of counsel to loyal organisation in Ireland from Mr W their countrymen on behalf of industry, honesty, or Hastings, of Dublin, wrote temperance. They might sometimes point out that industry and temperance would do much to lessen the r, Q. ^ , Reform Club, March 9, 1887. evils with which Ireland is afflicted, but that might not Dear Sir—Surely you need no opinion of mine in add to their influence or to the money contributions favour of any expression of loyal sentiments in your they raise from Irishmen In Ireland or in America. The andnnparlv^lf+hls y ^5®? pafty bave a11 the talk, Land Act of 1881 gave a most complete security to the & u yi i ,e ííe,r favour* and they pre- result of industry on the part of the tenants ; but their ^25« . Ireland is with them. They think or say leaders have condemned the legislation so much in their ÏÏÎin m0r° AhBn ' n u 10*, of Pr°te*tantS who are favour, and have never advised them to make an honest against them, and a million of honest moral Catholics use of their new position. Industry has no chance in who would be delighted if the disorder in their country the turmoil of revolution, and so long as the Irish could be suppressed. The two millions of loyal populZ tenantry are influenced and misled by a conspiracy i a thr®e ^ í111?118 make noise enough whose main objects are to plunder the landlord and for the whole island, and their leaders are engaged con- excite bitter hatred of England, I see little hope of Th«1ovJnr£ÎT vn* f i l Sr®?œof/edition and rebellion. improvement in the condition of the country. I hope The loyal Catholics find it difficult to move and to oppose your volume may be widely read in Ireland. It will so many of their bishop and their priests. If they excite much thought, and c*n do only good.—Yours could unite with the loyal Protestants their united voices very sincerely, JoHN Brtgrt would give strength to the Government and the cause of order. I cannot point out how this can be done but it seems to me that it ought to be done, if not absolutely impossible.—Yours very respectfully, J o h n B r ig h t . JX.-THE PARNELLITE CONSPIRACY. Mr. Bright, in February, 1887, addressed the following letter to a Liberal Unionist of Bir­ XI.—WHY THE “ MAJORITY ” MUST mingham who had asked him whether he in­ tended to address his constituents shortly, and NOT PREVAIL. for his views as to the negotiations then going on Th§ following letter was addressed by Mr relating to the project of Liberal reunion :— Bright to the Rev. Father Sherlock, of Birming­ ham :— 6 Alexandra Hotel, Hyde Park Corner. Reform Club, Pall Mall, S.W., , I'ondon, Feb. 9fch, 1887. Dear bir—You ask questions which no one can answer -p» 0 . T , , March15th, 1887. I have been accustomed to go to Birmingham at the Dear Sir—I have little to add to what I have said in invitation aud under the arrangements of the Liberal my speech at Birmingham on the 1st July last, and in Association. I suppose it has been thought best not to letteislhave since and recently written on the ques­ hold any meeting under the present confusion in the tions on which you have addressed me. political world. My sympathy for Ireland is as strong as in past years As to my opinions, I stated them very fully at the andl am as anxious to do justice to her people, and it Town Hall meeting on the 1st of July last. I left no is this sympathy which makes it impossible for me to consent to hand over to this “ rebel oonspiracy” the 1 m [ s o,^ Vie^ 8 011 thô Irl8h quation, and what has happened since has only tended to confirm me government of five millions of the subjects of the Queen m those views The break in the Liberal party is to be of whom I cannot doubt two millions are loyal and attributed to the unwisdom of its leader, and the most content with the Union with Great Britain deplorable thing in the whole of the disaster is the You speak of the “ majority” in Ireland, and ask manner in which the bulk of the party has abandoned why they should not prevail ? That majority its position and its policy to adopt a new position and a would probably vote to make their country I State of the American Union if it were put to neTh?r°fvCv invitation or command of that leader. them by their present leaders. But should the majority n lp jS r ar9 ag0 *the Ubulk of the Liberal party- of the United Kingdom consent to it ? I am asked why r i i Pea<*> # retrenchment, and reform-followed Lord Palmerston into the war with Russia Nnw fht 6 l ea, s* 1 d,) trusfc thei» most party will condemn their course of thirtyy«„ At entirely. I have seen their course for seven years nast this moment they are talking for, and votlS f.r and hav# heard and read their speeches. I believe in measures which few of them understand a«,r,Hnr those spe^kag, and see in them only hatred to England them as good from the hand, of a popular * and disloyjJty to the Crown, and I am unwilling to I have been associated very intimatelv with entrust to their tender mercies any portion of the popu- popular Minister for twenty years I have # ParliainenT ** Government of the Imperial Ireland for thirty years, aV h a^ implied T c ^ J " Prime Ministers to do what legislation cando for that It is believed that there aie probably fortv mPmh.ra country. My sympathy for the Irtok p e o p T l f iwmrm from Ireland who rit In our Parliament, if not by votw yet bv the EUppertofdollars contributed by the avowed ÎînïLni ^ ®ve-r lfc waB’ aQd ifc ls with sympathy enemies of E«jUnd on the American Continent. Am I thei t ^ a i i .that I dare not h a n T o r w their intereata to the conspiracy which is bent on de«*r#r U trurt the« men and make them master of one of the mg the owner, of the Ia*f» on. th« hSK three Kinsdom.! I. ,t not possible that my sympathy may be» warm a. yonrs forthe Irish people, incfeven th .M ‘d tPn £ rd' th9 01 I«Ta„d7rom as warm and intelligent for those who are members of your unuroh T h»TeeiTen up the principles of my e«Tly days. I adhere to them without doubting as to J o h n B r ig h t 's L e t t e r s o h H o m e R u l e . their soundness, and never more firmly than now.—I may understand the case. Parliament Bas really nothing am, very respectfully yours, J o h n B r ig h t . to do with the matter. These conspirators and their The Rev. John Sherlock, 123, Moor Street, papers have charged Lord Spencer and Mr. Forster with Birmingham. murder and of hanging men of whose innocence they were well assured, but Parliament did not interfere to XII.—AN IMPRACTICABLE PLAN. proteot the Lord-Lieuteuant and Chief Secretary, and why should it interfere to defend the Irish writers and Mr. J. A. Kilman, publisher of Pleasure m id speakers? The Courts are open. Why should Parlia­ Profit, wrote to Mr. Bright suggesting that the ment assume the duties and the labour of the ordinary Irish land question might be settled as follows :— Courts of Justice ? They can administer justice to other (1) Pass an Act compelling the proprietors of agri­ oriminals, why not in the case of the men for whom they cultural land in Ireland to sell to a company, to be seem to plead ?—Yours truly, J oh n B r ig h t . formed under the Companies Acts or under a special Act, at a stated number of years’ purchase of a fair rental. (2) Form a company under the Companies XY.—THE HUMILIATION OF THE Acts or under a special Act with a minimum dividend guaranteed by a Government, which company would LIBERAL PARTY. paroel out said lands in plots, and sell to the highest Mr. Baily (secretary of the National Radical bidder, the price to be paid by instalments on the well- Union) read tne following letter from Mr. John known building society principle. Bright on the occasion of the great Unionist Mr. Bright replied as follows :— meeting at the Town Hall, Birmingham, on June Reform Club, March 23, 1887. 2nd, 1887. The letter was addressed to Mr. Dear Sir—I do not think there is any need for another Chamberlain :— great land settlement in Ireland. The question is raised Rochdale, May 30, 1887. by the rebel party as a weapon by which they hope they My dear Chamberlain—An engagement entered into may compel England to grant Home Rule, a step to­ two months ago, and which I cannot now break, will not wards Irish independence. Your plan, so far as I can allow me to take part in your meeting on Wednesday. understand it, is altogether impracticable, and I can give I can only wish you the success which our cause merits, no sanction to it. I am so burdened with letters that I and observing what is passing around us I come to tho must ask you to exouse me if I can only briefly notice conclusion that the cause is prospering. The friends of and reply to your letter.—I am, truly yours, disunion become more angry, and the language with J o h n B r ig h t . regard to us who differ from them more severe and moro bitter. This is some proof that they feel that theit XIII,—THE CRIMES BILL NECESSARY. restoration to office and to power is becoming lesa probable or possible, so long as they adhere to the policy Acknowledging a resolution passed in April, which was so signally defeated at the election in July 1887. at the Greenwich Conservative Club, Mr. last. Bright wrote j— It is impossible to believe that the constituencies can I believe it is neoessary to strengthen the Executive see with sympathy and approval the conduct of the power in Ireland, and I have therefore hitherto sup Opposition, which is led by the dual partnership of Mr. ported the bill now before the House of Commons (the Gladstone and Mr. Parnell. Within the last two years Crimes Bill). No Government, Liberal or Conservative, —and. indeed, within one year of that period—we hay© will promote measures ot this kind except under a strong seeu three Administrations outvoted and destroyed in Bense of their necessity. They bring a Government into the House of Commons, Mr. Gladstone’s Government much difficulty, and with not a few persons make it was destroyed by the vote on Mr. Childers’s Budget on unpopular, and they interfere greatly with the Parlia­ the 8th June, 1385. Lord Salisbury came into office, mentary measures which every Administration is anxious and he was beaten and his Government destroyed by to carry through Parliament. The present Government the special action of Mr. Gladstone on the 30th Januay, believed in the necessity of this bill or of some bill having 1886; and on the 7th of June, six months later, Mr. a like objeot. I believe that some measure of this kind Gladstone was defeated on his Irish Government Bill, is demanded by the condition of Ireland. In 1881 and and now he is doing all in his power to overthrow the 1882 I oonsented to measures of repression for the sake Government of Lord Salisbury. I do not know if there of law and order. I was then a member of the Govern­ is any other case in our Parliamentary history -in which ment. What I thought needful then, and what I think so many changes of Government have taken place iu so needful now, I will not condemn or oppose because it is short a time. The French Government, I suspect, does introduced into Parliament by a Conservative and not a not offer an example of the fatal defeat of three Liberal Government. Administrations within twelve months. Mr. Gladstone was beaten on his Irish Government Bill on the 7th June, 1886, and he instantly dissolved XIV.—“ PARNELLISM AND CRIME.” Parliament. His Irish bills had been fully explained and discussed, and a majority of thirty votes decided A correspondent in West Renfrewshire having against him. He appealed at once to the constituencies, written to Mr. Bright asking why the Times to the masses, to the householders of the United should not be called upon to substantiate the Kingdom. The result was fatal to his bills and to his grave charges it made against certain members Government. If the eighty-six disloyal Irishmen had of the Irish National party, and why the printer j been absent, taking the whole representation of Britain and the loyal Irishmen from Ulster, the majority of that journal should not have been dealt with returned was as two to one against them. _ lo this grea by Parliament, the right hon. gentleman for- majority, given on a specific question of «fais own raising, warded the following reply it might have been expected that an experienced states* Reform Club, Pall Mall, S.W., would have yielded, but instead of this he abuses May 10th, 1887. the11 majority*,^says^ unpleasant things of men who have Dear Sir—You do not seem to be aware that all the , deserted wv* him, ---- and,» - having----- » turned his i t own coat in»*»* *o charges of the Times consist of evidence contributed by j suddenly, he has no patience with Liberals ot even longe the rebel conspirators------■ ! standing themselves. than himself They arewho statementsrefuse to turn their coats al drawn from United Ireland in Dublin, from the Irish hiss bidding. Diaaing. , , , . . .. • 1 Vovldt in New York, and from other papers edited by, But vwhat * of the partnership, and to what has it. ledJ oi thç property of, active men of the conspiracy. The I vventure en ti to say to such a humiliation of the Libciw facts are their own facts. The Times has not invented party wiuonhich stillsim adheres«uiicica to iU Mr. »i. Gladstone ----- as its - historj . m tkem. It has only put them in order so that the uublie U» j uot before exhibited. Xbc liber»! yartj J o in r B r ig h t 's L b t t b m o f B o m b R ü m .

witii Lord Palmerston intothe war with Russia in 1854, at least as muon as Wales differs from England, but and crowds of Nonconformists and their ministers were Wales is treated to a flattery which, if not insincere, enthusiastic in his support. How many of them now seems to be childish, and Ulster is forgotten in the dis- can look back upon their conduot without shame or cussion of the Irbh question. Is it not wonderful lio vr regret? deoided Mr. Gladstone can be, and how his great intel­ But the Ethiopian of 1881 and 1882 has changed his lect can be subjected to one idea, and how he can banisli ■kin. What is the proof of this ? The United Ireland from his mind everything, however important, which (Dublin) newspaper is said to be the property of two does not suit the subject or objeot which he has before leading members of the “ Irish party,” and Mr. O’Brien him ? He speaks, too, as if it were a good thing to make is its editor. The editor is now in Oanada or the United Wales almost as un-English as he assumes all Ireland to States. He has visited Oanada that he might slander be. He conceals the fact that there are more loyal men the representative of the Queen, and it may be to excite and women in Ireland than the whole population of men •omething like insurrection against him. The last report m WaIes- is 8acl ^at an ex-Minister of him is that he would not spend the Queen’s birthday should descend to artifices so transparent, and that on territory under the British Crown, so great is his crowds of his countrymen should be thus imposed upon. hatred of England and of England’s "Sovereign I In Ire­ —Yours very sincerely, j0HN B r ig h t . land an active member of the rebel conspiracy congratu­ lates the Mayor of an important Corporation in bis refusal to show civility or loyalty to one whom ne XVII. —A REPLY TO MR. GLADSTONE. desoribes as a foreign Sovereign, and United Ireland, a newspaper whioh is the property of Mr. Glad­ Giadstone replied to the above letter, stone’s most important Irish supporters in Par­ and Mr. Bright answered as follows liament, concludes an article on the oourse taken My dear Mr. Gladstone—My remark as to your speech by the Town Council of the City of Cork in was not strictly accurate. I wrote from memor/ and regard to the Thanksgiving Service in Westminster the sentence about Ulster was not sufficiently definite Abbey by saying that “ the Mayor caused a letter to to have fixed itself in my memory. I regret the be written setting forth why he and the Town Council apparent want of accuracy; but on reading over the declined to take any part in a celebration which to all report of yonr speeoh, I may observe that you deal with true Irishmen must be sickening.” ~ the Ulster question in a way not calculated to give any It is to this conspiracy, consisting of men of this comfort or any hope to the loyal population of that character, that the great surrender is to be made. It is province. to the “ Eiehty-six ’ Club of Irish members, of whom You say—11 if therei be a desire, a well-considered It is said at least forty of them sit in Parliament by deBire, on the part of the Protestant population in the right of dollars contributed in America by the avowed portion of Ulster capable of being dealt with separately enemies of England and of the Queen’s right to govern, we were perfectly agreed to consider any plan for thé that the great English Liberal party is called on to purpose. But can anything be more unsatisfactory abandon its past policy and prostrate itself before an than this sentence? You ask for a “ well-considered odious, illegal, and immoral conspiracy. And to this desire on the part of the “ Protestant population.11 conspiracy, made a Parliament in Dublin, we are to Has it not been known to all men that the desire has transfer the government of two millions of the Irish eil considered, and that it has been expressed in people who are as loyal as are the inhabitants of the the loudest tones by those who are entitled to speak for county of Warwick, and who loudly protest against the the Protestant inhabitants of the province ? change. And all this we are asked and advised to do by You speak of the Protestants “ in the portion of a statesman who has been for ten years the chief adviser Ulster capable of being dealt with separately,” and for of the Crown. these you are prepared “ to consider any nlan for the There are some men in the House of Commons now purpose j but you must know that auy plan for dealing following Mr. Gladstone and his Irish colleagues who do only with the Protestants of Ulster by themselves, and It with great doubt—some, I am persuaded, with a feel­ not associated with the rest of the population of the ing not far removed from loathing. Their countenances provinoe, is an impossible plan, and not worth one express dissatisfaction and regret, and something akin to moment s consideration. shame. How long they will march in line with the w1? ,dealinf question, even in a speech to Insh eighty-six, how long they will come up day after Welshmen, I think Ulster has a claim upon you for a day to the whip of the front Opposition bench, the pro­ definite expression of opinion as to your plan for the gress of the session will show. future government of the province. Your plan a year We who remain true to the principles and policy of the ago was to place Ulster under the rule of a Parliament Liberals, who have gained so many victories of recent m Dublin, and the people know and dread that their years, must grieve over the temporary ruin of the partv future fortunes would be subjeot to the control of a body but we may console ourselves with the knowledge that of men about whose character and aims you and T differ our course lias been direct, and that we stand before the very seriously. You deem them patriotic. I hold them country guiltless of the misohief and without blame— to be not patriots, but conspirators against the Crown Sincerely yours, J o h n B r ig h t ! and Government of the United Kingdom. It is not loi *r I he Right Hon. J. Chamberlain, M.P. since we agreed, or I thought we agreed, on this point* You have changed your opinion. I can only rpgret that I have not been able to change mine. XVI.—MR. GLADSTONE AND ULSTER. The recent astounding revelations in the Times newi- Mr. Thomas Sinclair, who presided over apaper must have confirmed the fears and anxieties of the Liberal Unionist demonstration at Belfast- people of Ulster, and have increased their dread of beinz received the following reply from Mr. Bright : —subjec ed to the rule of M r Parnell and of his agent* and followers in Ireland and in the House of Common* TWr. or t j-u i 0ne 4®h* Rochdale, June 6, 1887. I grieve that I cannot act with you as in years past, Dear Sir I thank you for your friendly letter and for but my judgment and my conscience forbid it If I havi the copy of the resolutions passed at your recent great said a word that seems harsh or unfriendly, I will -sk Te din1?Mr r U T * °f th\ Uûion- I have just been you to forgive it.—Always sincerely yours, ïnèaks a f i l S 8peeohes. in South Wales. He Protestant Í were no province of Ulster and no To the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M.p ! Ireland H. L 5?* m?U Catholic Population in K seems ignorant or unconscious of the fact XVIII. “ I HAVE NOT CHANGED.” o n î r ï e^ 0 000OnHalr ha(} * P o tio n in 1881 of Ulster w S i .whlch is, I think, less than that of rufmi,! y 80™ethy?S mo-e than 300,0C0. Ulster may be J a n e ' ?RR7ht |laVÍng his afctention called in d.emed a nationality cuffering from the rest of Ireland June, lop/, to an extract published from a speech delivered by him to the Cork FarnW 8 J o h n B r ig h t ’s L e t t e r s o n H o m e R ttle .

Club twenty-one years ago in which he said, “flf Glasgow. Under ordinary circumstances I would rather you had a ’Parliament on College Green clearly not interfere in your contest, but the circumstances are tiie tenantry of Ireland, with the present feeling not ordinary, and I will answer your question with the frankness which you desire. Your candidates are in Ireland, would be able to force that Parliament Liberals with whom I have acted and voted for many to any measure of justice they desired,” wrote yearsas in the House of Commons. Each of them in follows :— ordinary times would have claims on the confidence of a 18, Clifford Street, Loudon, June 30, 1887. Liberal constituency. But a great question haa been Dear Sir—What I said to the Cork Farmers’ Club was forced to the front by an eminent leader of the Liberal true, and I have nothing to retract. The same may be party, and your election will turn upon that question. said of Scotland and Wales, and of the great counties of To me it seems that Sir George Trevelyan thinks no Lancashire and Yorkshire, but it doea not follow that it sacrifice too great to sustain the unity of the Liberal would be wise to establish so many Parliaments in order party; for this he is now willing to give up the unity of the to give special influence to special portions of our popu­three kingdoms, having abandoned the position he occu­ lation. When I spoke the representation of Ireland was pied a year ago. Then he denounced the Irish policy of divided, half on one side of the House and half on the Mr. Gladstone, which he is now willing and even eager other side. No Irish member or party seemed to know to accept. Mr. Gladstone5# disunion policy has under­ what Ireland required, and until the formation of the gone no essential change. He gives us many speeches, Government of Mr. Gladstone at the end of the year but there is no clear departure from his scheme of last 1868 no resolute attempt was made to deal with Irish year. Sir George Trevelyan asks you to send him to questions. Parliament to support Mr. Gladstone, whose return to The good measures passed since the year 1880 have office and to power, so long as he is resolved to give up been obstructed by a conspiracy which derives its funds the government of Ireland to Mr. Parnell and his fol­ and its inspiration to a larg® extent from enemies of lower», would in my opinion be a great calamity to England in the United State» of America. But for Ireland and to Great Britain. Mr. Ashley, your other the action of that conspiracy I believe the great Land candidate, is a Liberal, as Sir George Trevelyan is, but Bill of 1881 would have given tranquillity to the with this essential difference. He doubtless values tenantry of Ireland. I need not tell you how I have party, but for party he is unwilling and unable to sacri­ advocated economical and political changes for Ireland fice the unity of vital interests of his country. I value long before they were mentioned or thought of by men the Liberal party, and have worked much longer for it and statesmen who now pretend to a special interest in and with it than either Mr. Gladstone or Sir George the oountry. Trevelyan has done, but I will not follow a majority of I am as true a friend to Ireland now as I have ever the party led by a statesman whose Irish policy little been, aud it ii for this reason that I object to sever the more than a year ago the whole party almost unani­ United Kingdom, and to surrender 5,000,000 of our mously condemned. Mr. Gladstone has led the Liberal population to the rule of a conspiracy which is repre­ iarty into difficulty and danger. The country will not sented ia the Horree of Commons by forty or fifty Îet him ico forward, and Mr. Parnell will not let him go members who sit there by virtue of contributions from back. Of the future it is difficult to speak, but to my America, from men whoso avowed object is to separate view our duty is clear. If I were an elector in your Ireland from Great Britain and permanently to break division or city I should give my vote to Mr. Ashley, for up the Union of the three Kingdoms. I have made no my country and its true interests, and not for a candi­ change in my opinions of the Irish question. Others date ready to follow a leader whose Irish policy, in my have changed, and to them my consistency is offensive. judgment, tends only to confusion and danger.—I am, They follow their leader and strive to look happy in the very respectfully yours, J o h n B r ig h t . pit of difficulty and party ruin into which his mistakes Mr. John W. Mitchell, 33, Hope Street, Glasgow. nave led them. I cannot join them or help them. I can only deplore the wreck of the Liberal party which I Bee around me.—Yours very truly, J o h n B r ig h t . XXI.—MR. GLADSTONE PERVERTS IRISH HISTORY. XIX.—THE CHIEFS OF A CONSPIRACY. The following letter was written to a well- In reply to a Belfast Liberal gentleman, who known County Mayo landlord concerning Dr. had forwarded to Mr. Bright a token of regard, Dunbar Ingram’s recent book, “ The History of the following reply was received :— the Legislative Union of Great Britain and 18, Clifford Street, W. London, July 1, 1887. Ireland.” Mr. Bright’s letter is as follows :— My dear Mr.—.—I have had during all my political life London, August 8th, 1887. a great sympathy for your country and your people. Dear Sir—I have read Mr. Dunbar Ingram’s book This I have shown in many speeches made on their with great interest, and hope it may be widely read. behalf, when those who pretend now to talk loudly in It gives a complete answer to the extravagant assertions their favour were silent or were opposed to me. I cannot of Mr. Gladstone as to the manner in which the Union consent to subject your population, Protestant or was accomplished. I have in years past said some things Catholic, to the acting members and chiefs of the about the Union, and what was done by the Government conspiracy which has done so much to demoralise your at the time, which I should not have said had I known country. the faots which Mr. Ingram has brought before the public I hope and believe that the policy of Mr. Gladstone is in his book. There can be no doubt that the Catholic being more strongly condemned as discussion proceeds, bishops and the Catholic population in general were in and as the conduct of the combined Opposition in the favour of the Union. It relieved them from the supre­ House of Commons is observed.—Believe me, very truly macy of the Protestants, and placed them under the just yours, J o h n B r ig h t . and generous control of the Imperial Parliament. Mr. ——, Belfast. It would be well to have a cheap edffion of Mr. Ingram’s work. In 1800 the Catholics sought relief from the intoler* XX.—ON SIR GEORGE TREVELYAN. ance of the Protestant party. In our day, the Irish Protestants protest «gainst being subjected to the Mr. Bright addressed the following letter Catholic Parliament and party which Mr. Gladstone’s to an elector of the Bridgeton Division ofpolicy would place in supreme power in Dublin. I Glasgow believe the most intelligent of your Catholic country­ ^ London, July 28th, 1887. men, and the possessors of property among them, would iJear Sir You ask mv opinion as to the candidates refer to entrust their future and their fortunes to an • h o aro now before the ©lectors of rour division of fmperial Parliament in Westminster rather than to an J o h n B r ig h t 's L e t t e r s o n H om e R u l e G assembly in Dublin, directed by the leaders of the revo­ longer associated, and for which I have worked more lutionary scheme now pressed forward, in alliance with than any of its present acting leaders, from the humilia­ the bitter hostility of the Irish and anti-English party in tion with which it is threatened ; aud I would, with my the United States. sympatuy for Ireland, save its population from the future Mr. Ingram’s excellent work will be very useful to aU conduct of the men who are answerable for much of its who can read and reason upon the great contest which is present sufferings and for all the disorder by which it is now before us.— Believe me, sincerely yours, now afflicted and disgraced. J o h n B r ig h t . There are two million of loyal people in Ireland. Let us be firm in our resolve, if it be possible, as I believe it is possible, not to sever them from the guardianship of XXII.—A REAL FRIEND OF IRELAND. the Crown of the United Kingdom and from the shelter Mr. Bright wrote to a Glasgow correspon­and the justice of the Imperial Parliament. This is the dent :— answer I give to the false and malignant aspersions by Melrose, October 1, 1887. which I am assailed, and to which you have called my Sir—I never was more the friend of Ireland than I attention.—I am, very truly yours, J o h n B r ig h t . am now, when objecting to handiffg the unfortunate country over to the rule of the revolutionary and rebel conspiracy with which the Government is now contend­ XXIV.— MR. PARNELL THE CONNECT­ ing. Justice to Ireland requires not only that the laws should be just, but that they should be obeyed. It is ING LINK. my sympathy with the Irish people which forces me into The Hon. A. D. Elliot, M.P. for Roxburgh­ strong opposition to the political views of Mr. Gladstone shire, addressing a meeting of his constituents and Mr. Parnell. The latter, so far as I know, has not at Kelso, in October, 1887, read the following changed. The former five years ago condemned and letter from Mr. Bright :— denounced him ; now he comes forward as his apologist and defender. Am I wrong not to follow?—Yours very Melrose, Ootober 3, 1887. truly, J o h n B r ig h t . Dear Mr. Elliot—I see you are expected to address your constituents at Kelso on Wednesday of this week. I should like to be there if I could be present only as a XXIII.—WHEN FORCE 18 A REMEDY. listener, but that is scarcely possible ; but if I do not speak I may write a few lines to express my sympathy A Liberal Unionist in Derbyshire haying called with you, and my hope that you will be able to explain Mr. Bright’s attention to the fact that the Glad- clearly what are the grounds on which we are compelled stonians stated that he could not support the to differ from great numbers, and indeed from the main Irish policy of the Government, especially theportion, of the Liberal party, led they scarcely know whither by Mr. Gladstone in connection with hi* Irish suppression of the National League, inasmuch policy. as he had declared that force was no remedy, Mr. For myself I do not discuss the question of a little Bright replied as follows :— more or a little less of a Parliament in Dublin. A Par­ Melrose, N.B., Oct. 2, 1887. liament is a great weapon if once created and opened— Dear Sir—I am not surprised at what you tell me. not difficult to form, but dangerous to deal with ; and The Disunionists, whether under Mr. Gladstone in to set up a Dublin Parliament now would make Mr. England or under Mr. Parnell in Ireland, are not Parnell one of the Prime Ministers of the Queen, at careful as to the truthfulness of their statements. They least nominally of the Queen. At present he sulks or quote my expressions of sympathy with the Irish people skulks at Avondale, and is silent amid the tumult he has in past year» as justifying the demand for a Parliament done so much to create, while his lieutenants keep the in Dublin. They quote a passage from one of my rebellion pot boiling in three of the provinces of Ireland. speeches—“ force is no remedy—which is quite as His right hand clasps the hand of Mr. Gladstone on this true now as it was true when I used those words. side of the Atlantic, and with the other he maintains a Force is no remedy for a just discontent, but it fraternal greeting with the gang in New York, by whom is a remedy, and often the only remedy, for the disorder outrage and murder were and are deemed patriotism in and the violence against whioh our laws are provided. Ireland, and who collect the funds out of which more I supported the acts of Mr. Gladstone’s Government in than half the Irish party in the Parliament at West­ 1881 and 1882 to put down the Land League and the minster receive their weekly and monthly pay to insult disorder in Ireland. I now support the Government in the Speaker and to make useful legislation impossible. their endeavour to suppress the rebel movement of the Mr. Gladstone tells us that a preliminary condition as National League, which is the Land League under to the future Irish measure is that it must be satisfac­ another name. tory to Ireland—meaning Mr. Parnell. Thus his coming My sympathy for Ireland was not born of faotion and bill or bills must run on the lines of the leader of the in a struggle for office and pay and power. It wa3 as strong section of the House who are paid to play at rebellion as it is now thirty years ago, before Mr. Gladstone, Sir in Ireland and to discredit the Parliament of Great William Harcourt, or Mr. Morley, and their noisy Britain. The Liberal party is to forget its honourable followers, had a word to say in favour of the Irish past and to adopt this hideous polioy for its future, and tenantry or of the sufferings of any portion of the Irish all this is to be done at the bidding of one man, a states­ people. That sympathy is not lessened in my mind, but man of great eminence, but no more free from liability is strengthened by recent events. We have delivered to error than are other statesmen who have been held in the Irish tenant from all that was unjust and oppressive some respect by the country. The two millions of loyal in the laws affecting his tenure of land. What more population in Ireland are to be forgotten, and their claim is needed, or most needed, Is to set him free from the to a voice in this crisis of their fate is derided and wicked conspiracy which is leading him to dishonesty rejected. In this Jubilee year they are to be blotted out and to crime. He is taught by the leaders of this con­ from the grand list of the subjects of the Queen, and to spiracy that his true intoreit is to plunder his landlord be passed over to what there is of truthfulness and and to cherish a bitter hatred of England ; and industry, wisaom aud justice in the men in whom we have seen and honesty, and regard for the law, are not only these qualities and virtues wholly ignored during the neglected, but despited and condemned. last seven years. The Liberal party is asked to make It is this conspiracy whioh the bulk of the Liberal this great surrender, it is to forget its noble past, and to party is now asked to ally itself with. Its leaders, adopt a future leading to a gulf the depth of which no forgetting whatever is honourable in its past history, one can sound. Surely the Liberals of your noble ask their followers to march in a path which can lead county will not knowingly make a surrender whi<-h may only to party disgrace and national disaster. I would be so fatal and must be b o humiliating and ifnominiou*. •ave the Liberal party, with which I have been much I place the question before you as it stands before me. i o J o h n m i g h t s i æ t t b m o n H o o t R u l *.

I deal In no extravagance of languir,*,, »m state tfië case in simplicity, and, I hope, with clearness.—Believe desirabie cnange may be made. As it succeeds ft me, sincerely youra, J o h n B r ig h t . itUlfrea L Prdln8e°tf *th lt WÎ11 uatur*]17 «tend lhe Hon. Arthur Elliot, Minto House, Hawick. lords / ?pinion3 and interests of land- mav vote fr°m year to *ear Parliament policy °o fa? SUmS t0 carry out the transfer XXV. — WHAT MR. BRIGHT THOUGHT c e e íin r i n +£• succe3S m V Ju?tify extension. Pro- OF COMPULSORY LAND PURCHASE. involve the TmÎÜ ^ wil1 nofc be necessary to contests lftl Exoh®(luer in dangerous risk, or in Mr. Gladstone proposed in 1886 to compel nor wiU thiir!01? * °r j0nie8’ or Poor-law Unions , Irish landowners to sell their estates to the ad van pm nee<* to tftke security for its tenants. Mr. Bright’s views on the land question has recentlv h** adc*ition duties on Irish imports, as are given in the following letter :— wül Í! nn of« A Pr?P°sed- The process of transfer far the L naniBm°Kd? tC T ed’ and wil1 be seen how One Ash, Rochdale, November 11, 1887. hnníaf • ^?ntB who hav® owners are willing and Dear Lord Kilraorey—I cannot undertake to discuss at honest in the payment of the rents they have engaged length the propositions made in your recent letter to the sníaí’ u? jJ*1* als° be less danSer of any wide­ Times, but I may say something of my views on the Irish spread combination to throw upon the Imperial Ex. land question. chequer the enormous cost which any failure of the plan of a general and compulsory sale and purohase may I do not agree with those who are saying so muoh or might involve. about the dual ownership, as if there is a great import­ ance in that phrase. The Land Aot of 1881 auithe ,fífMmCUrÍ0US touwitne" th® lashuess with whioh soma Land Courts have given fifteen years’ leases to the amí fpao^ m?mbers of Parliament, and public writer» tenants at a rent fixed by the Courts during the period o p Í íf k newspapers rush in and seize upon and of fifteen years. To me there seems no reason why nnwH f ^ s so wild and unnecessary as are now pro- under these leases landlord and teuant should not live posed for the settlement of the Irish land question. 1 In as muoh harmony as they have lived in past times was before them all in pointing out the evil and the under ordinary leases in Ireland, and as they live now in remedy. My remedy had in it the oharaoter of modéra- Great Britain. The difficulty arises, not from dual tion, and if the Government will act upon it the result ownership, but from the agrarian and revolutionary S ' and ,the7 wil1 nofc involve themselves in agitation which has been created and continued since the difficulties the magnitude of which they cannot measure. passing of the great Aot of 1881. But for that agitation , them learn something from the fate of the monstreua I believe that Act would have given a large measure of plan proposed by Mr. Gladstone, which I suspect no one contentment and tranquillity in Ireland. but himself and two or three of his colleagues ever approved, and which now almost every man is willing to As to further legislation, I cannot see the reason for condemn. any sweeping measure of purohase. The Act known as Lord Ashbourne s Act makes it easy for buyer and seller 4.u^?U S^i?ee *^*t * am a8ainst the wild scheme. I tenant and landlord, to transfer a farm from one to think Parliament has gone far enough. I am for the other, and thus, wherever it is desirable to be done moderation in this question. I would not decree the tenants will gradually become owners, and the Irish banishment of all Irish proprietcrs, nor would I make ownership of land willbeoome more extended and secure. my friend Mr. Goschen the universal absentee proprietor I am told the transaction or transfer is more slow and and rent-collector for the whole of the landed property tedious than it ought to be. But surely this may be of Ireland.—Forgive this too long letter, and believt remedied, and the process of replacing the present owners mmi7cï? *\ruï7 y?urs» John Bright. by tenants may go on at the same time in all parts of the I he Earl of Kilmorey, Mourne Park, oountry. Newry, County Down, Ireland. The idea of buying up or buying out the proprietary class seems to me monstrous, unnecessary, and unjust. XXVI.—AN “ INFAMOUS LEAFLET." There are hundreds, many hundreds, of proprietors in Ireland who do not wish to be bought out. They would Mr. Bright, in October, 1887, addressed the prefer to retain possession of their ancestral mansions following letter to theScotsman with reference and estates, and have no wish to seek homes in Great to the tactics of Mr. Gladstone’s supporters :— Britain or elsewhere. For Parliament to insist on a com­ a . Melrose, Oct. 11, 1887. pulsory sale would be to gratify the disloyal leaders in Sir—You have often commented on the tactics pur­ Ireland. They wish to get rid of the proprietary class sued by the followers of Mr. Gladstone. I will ask you and then they say, and perhaps they believe, they could to inform the multitude of your readers and the pro­ unite the whole of Ireland in hostility to England. To fessing Liberals of Scotland what course is being taken get rid of the proprietors will be to establish a wholesale by the party which in London is allied with our late system of absenteeism and to make the Chancellor of eminent leader and with Mr. Parnell. A correspondent the Exchequer the great receiver of the rents from the of mine writes to me from London that a leaflet, of great all-Ireland abeentee estate. Is it possible that any which I send you a copy, is being widely circulated from sane statesman Will consent to such a scheme or offer to house to house in some of the constituencies of the Metro­ Parliament and the country so wild a policy as that polis. He says that one local printer has received an order involved in it ? for 60,000 copies, which shows how extensive is the cir­ I have no affection for the system of landlordism as it culation intended to be given to this slanderous and has presented itself in too many cases in Ireland. I infamous production. The leaflet is headed with the have condemned it and urged its reform in speeches in words of Mr. Gladstone, “ Remember Mitchelstown— Parliament and on public platforms in England and in W. E. Gladstone.” Then follow these words, “ In Ireland so far back as thirty years ago. I have said memoiy of the massacre of Mitchelstown by Balfour’s there could be no security for lauded property in Ireland bullet®, bayonet?, and bâton?.” Then follow these until land as a property was made free of sale and pur­ woids, “ Joseph Chamberlain and John Bright, Liberal chase by a radical change in our laws affecting its sale renegades and traitors to freedom, stand condemned by and purchase and tenure. I have suggested means by the nations—England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales— which this great reform might be effected, but I have with being the authors of this foul and cruel deed.” never held the opinion that the Government should step You will observe to what use the Ian gunge of Mr# in to banish the landlords and to make all tenants into Gladstone is here applied, and how ready are his owners, if not at the cost, yet at the risk of the Imperial followers to adopt any cry or any charge he may make Èixcüequer. to excite the passions of ignorant men against the I am of opinion that enough has been done. Lord Government he wishes to supplant, and which he ia Ashbourne ^ Act is a measure sufficiently extensive and I passionately labouring to succeed. Surely the tacvios effective. Uuaçr it by *ud sttfç pïocçss to e ! I ask you to excess will uiçet with seoerftl wuvlviuuutija J ohn Brio&t’s Letters on Home R ttlb . IT amongst your readers and jour countrymen. I can it wnen not needed makes a Government, unpopulara u a hardly hope that the Liberal Gladstonian papers will tends to destroy it. The information of the Government insert this letter from your columns, for this infamous is more complete than that of any other party or person, leaflet will teach a lesson to all who read it of the depth and they ask Parliament to grant incre .sed powers. I of degradation into which the Liberal party is being am willing to grant them. I was once before asked to rapidly forced by its alliance with the promoters and grant them, in 1881 and in 1882. 1 am willing to grant leaders of the rebel movement in Ireland.—Yours very them now to a Government which exists and rules by truly, J o h n B r ig h t . right of a Parliamentary majority of more than 100, returned by the household suffrage constituency so lately The following is the leaflet referred to : — as the month of July last year. “ REMEMBER MITOHELSTOWN 1”— W. E. Gladstone. XXVIII. —THE CONSPIRACY—HALF IRISH AND HALF AMERICAN. IN Mr. Bright addressed the following letter to MEMORY a correspondent, who wrote to him on Welsh Disestablishment :— OF THE One Ash, Rochdale. Dea; Sir—I can give no opinion as to the Welsh MASSACRE Church question being placed on the Liberal programme for the future. I do not muoh believe in what are ▲T called programmes. A year ago we thought we knew something as to the course and objeots of the Liberal party, but all is changed, and all is now confusion, and they who resisted the change and dreaded the confusion MITCHELSTOWN, are uow denounced by clubs and associations and con­ ferences as the authors of the misfortunes which have overtaken the party. I have no doubt of this, the BY Welsh Church question may, and probably will, remain unsettled for a time, whilst we are fighting over another question—whether one of the three kingdoms is to be BALFOUR’S handed over to the conspiracy, half Irish and half American, whioh is now at open war with the Govern­ ment of the Queen. As to how I shall vote on your BULLETS, Church question, I may say that I am not in the habit of making promises, but I hope my conduct in the future may not be inconsistent with my past Parliamentary BAYONETS, life.—Believe me, sincerely yours, J o h n B r ig h t .

AND XXIX.—“ I SUPPORT LORD SALISBURY AGAINST MR. PARNELL.’ ------BATONS. ------Mr. Bright sent the following reply to Mr. William Armstrong, of Chichester, who had Joseph Chamberlain and John written to him with regard to his scheme pro­ Bright, 44 Liberal renegades pounded before the electors of Birmingham, pro­ -... and Traitors to Freedom,” stand condemned by the nations— viding for a reference of Irish bills to a Grand England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales—with Committee of Irish members sitting at West­ being the authors of this foul and cruel deed. minster :— One Ash, Rochdale, Nov. 21, 1887. Dear Sir—The Irish rebel party will not look at my suggestion because they are rebels, and with rebel Irish XXVII.-ATTITUDE ON COERCION. members in the House the plan would not be allowed to In answer to the letter of an English Home work. Mr. Gladstone has a hobby or plan of his own in which the rebel leaders for the time have agreed to join Ruler Mr. Bright wrote :— him. He is committed to it, and oannot condescend to Rochdale, November 16, 1887. another plan which is less pretentious and more reason­ Dear Sir—You say that in the years 1880 and 1881 I able than his own. He has offered a scheme which the condemned Mr. Gladstone’s coercion measures. In those country has rejected,but whichhasmade all other schemes years I was a member of Mr. Gladstone’s Government, almost impossible. I do not thinkany thing can be done until so supported the Coercion Bills of 1881 and 1832, and his bills are entirely got rid of, and the present position for the same reasons that I have supported the present entirely changed. Mr. Gladstone stops the way. He Government in the measure of last session. If you were insists on an impossible Legislature for Ireland, and accurate in your facts perhaps you would be more wise in insists upon it to the exclusion of legislation for the your conclusions.—Yours truly, J o h n B r ig h t . whole kingdom, and his followers still have faith in him and are anxious to return him to power. They are furious because the Conseivatives are in office, and Mr. Bright, in a letter published in the Glasgow blame me and others for keeping them there. They Herald, said :— ^ seem blind to the fact that Mr. Gladstone put them in Ireland is the victim of a conspiracy whioh is in origin office. He would appeal to the eleotors ou the merits and object political, aud the case must be dealt with of his Irish bills, and the electors of Great Britain by ;i having this object in view. There is no need for a majority of nearly two to one condemned his bills and change of law in Great Britain. In Ireland a change is destroyed his Administration. We cannot allow Mr. needed, and the Government, whether under Lord Gladstone to come back to office with his Irish policy, Salisbury or Mr. Gladstone, ought to be supported. No and are willing to support a Government which the Government asks for any change in the law except under constituencies have by a great majority placed in power. tho yt;#§ura of exiting 4isvijlçr._ To aak (or I prefer to loin bauds with LsiiL Sai^yrv aud his 12 J o h n B r ig h t ’s L e t t e r s o n R om e R u l e .

colleagues rather than with Parnell and his friends, the leaders of tke Irish rebellion.—Yours very truly, Ireland will be forcibly ejected from the government of the Imperial Parliament, and practically from the rule J o h n B r ig h t . tL f ^ -n ’ av therefore 1 a*n strong in the belief fudVuhsS POllCy0f G^«»ill*otb,acc£*1 XXX.—SYMPATHY WITH RUFFIANS. Our duty is to go on—honestly actiug up to our con- An Irish voter in Mr. Bright’s constituency vjotiona of what is true. I am /orry iÍ A o t able to do having written to the right hon. gentleman more, but years cieep on, and their warning must not be asking him how he reconciled his later speeches i^D uhfin Ï the ,r e c e n f c me«tiug and speeches and letters with a speech delivered in 1870, in in Dublin must yield good results. Lord Hartington’s which he said that it was the custom of the Tory a°iar8crft n ^ r attr&PbJ^ hImJ;ho support and confidence of íw . I °f the Public.-Believe me always, very party to meet every demand for reform sincerely in vours JoHN b r ig h t . Ireland with coercion, Mr. Bright sent the Howard Morley, Esq., following reply :— 47, Grosvenor Street, London, W. ■p. c. , One Ash, Rochdale, Dec. 9, 1887. Dear Sir—Surely the extracts you sent me answer XXXII.—HONESTY* INDUSTRY, TEM- 72ÏÏÏ que?tioû- has Parliament been doing since PERANCE, AND THRIFT. 1870, and more since 1881, but making concessions and gran ting reforms for Ireland? When reforms were not The following letter was written by Mr. Bright made I did not oppose the Acts giving strength to the in reply to a request for his assistance in promot­ Executive Government, and now, when the great object ing the formation in Ireland of a Technical of Parliament is to do full justice to Ireland, I am the Commission or Department for the encourage­ less likely to see a system of terror in operation over a ment of Industry, on similar lines to those which iarge portion of the country and to refuse the legislation which the Government believes, aid which I believe, to have been adopted in Wurtemberg and other D5 necessary to repress it. (xerman States. An influential deputation sup­ You speak of the drastio policy of the Government porting these views had waited on Mr. Balfour i t is much less drastic than the policy of Mr. Gladstone’s in Dublin, on 19th December, 1887, and had been Government in 1881 and 1882, and if anyone denies this favourably received. The condition of Ireland he is either ignorant of the Acts of these years or is guilty of falsehood. In 1881 many hundreds of men shortly after that date rendered it almost imprac­ were put in prison for months withont trial, without ticable for immediate action in this direction. It evidence against them, without defence of counsel, and may, however, be noted that in the Purchase of without any proof of having broken the law. Now no Lind (Ireland) Act, 1891, Clause 39 empowers man is punished or imprisoned except after trial by two the Congested Districts Board to render assist­ magistrates, in an open Court, when witnesses may be heard in his behalf, and when counsel may be heard in ance in the development of agricultural and nis defence. general industries. The letter to which Mr. The ruffians who are exciting your sympathy are the Bright replied was written a few days after the supporters of the terror which prevails, and their interview with Mr. Balfour :— punishment, so far as I have seen any description of it, One Ash, Rochdale, December 27, 1887. isi more mild than their offences warrant. I have written Dear Mr. Harris—I fear I can be of no service to you, other letters in which I have explained the course I have for I have no faith in any Government department such rif -"0'1,111 seem thafc you have not seen or read as you suggest. In Ireland the power to spend money is them. This snort reply to your note may give the great, but the result is generally little or nothing. The information you see*.—I am, very truly yours, “ Nationalists ” as you call them, or as I call them the J o h n B r ig h t . rebel party, will give no substantial aid to any good work. They have been at work for seven years, but have never told the people in speeches or writings that XXXI.—“ THE WILD POLICY OF MR. honesty, industry, temperance, and thrift are necessary to GLADSTONE WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.” promote and sustain the prosperity of a people. They have exhorted them to plunder the landlords and to hate Mr. Howard Morley forwarded a volume England. I shall be much pleased if you can do the goad dealing with the life of his father (Mr. Samuel you are aiming at, and I am sorry not to be able to take Morley) to Mr. Bright, and received the follow­any part in your labours, but with the many engage­ ing powerful and beautifully-expressed letter in ments I have, and the little faith I can summon up in reply : — your direction, I fear I must ask you to excuse me if I cannot join you in your praiseworthy efforts for the -p. >T , 0ne Ash, Rochdale, Dec. 6, 1887. Dear Mr. Morley—I am grateful to you for your rescue of Ireland from its present troubled condition.— kind remembrance of me, and for the gift of the volume I am, sincerely yours, J o h n B r ig h t . winch contains so much that is interesting in the life of Alfred Harris, Esq., Kirkby Lonsdale. your father. I was sad to hear of his serious illness, J I felt how much every good cause had lost when we XXXIII.—“ SUPPOSING THE HOME round he was no longer among the living. I value the RULE BILL HAD PASSED.” book, and the more so as it is your kind gift. I value also what you say on the great question which The following letter was read at a meeting now disturbs the country, and which has broken up, not under the auspices of the Handsworth Radical only the Liberal party, but the political unity of many Association at the Public Hall, Handsworth, on families. I am not sure that our former leader has not the 11th January, 1888 :— done misclnet within the last two years that will over­ One Ash, Rschdale, January 9, 1838. balance much of the good of his former services : and Dear Mr. Graham—I oannot be present at your meet­ the demoralisation ot the bulk of the Liberal nartv ing on Wednesday, but I may be permitted to writs to seems to mo the worst part of mat mischief, for its you a few lines on the great question which you are moral sense seems to have become depraved, and about to discuss. Many of our opponents condemn us h L f +iW?- boa?t®<1. of lr> it£» former character because we have not blindly followed Mr. Gladstone as lift « ie tlr£evf?rsÍkeri ifc- I «uppose the cloud willthey have done, and that we have not sacrificed our lift some day, but just now we are in great darkness principles in order to maintain unity in the Liberal I cannot behove the two milhons of loyal people in party. Let mo remind you and them what ws have J o h n B r ig h t 's iæ t t k r s o n R o m e R ut ,*. 13 done, and how fax tha result has justified our course. XXXIV.—THE OLD REVOLUTION If the Unionist section of the Liberals in the «euion of 1886 had supported the Irish bills of Mr. Gladstone, hi# UNDER A MASK. Irish Government Bill in some shape would probably hare Mr. Brougham Leech, Professor of Juris­ passed. The Laud Bill oould not have passed, for being prudence and International Law in the Univer­ more easily understood it was more generally con­ sity of Dublin, and author ofa n admirable demned. We should, I suppose, by this time have seen an Irish Parliament sitting and debating and legislating pamphlet entitled “ The Continuity of the Irish in Dublin, and we should also have seen jP#ivy Council­ Revolutionary Movement,” received from Mr. lors and Cabinet Ministers of the Queen iu their high John Bright the following letter with reference offioes iu connection with the Dublin Parliament. to that work :— Where would the Queen find her Privy Councillors One Ash, Rochdale, Jan. 19, 1888. and the members of her Irish Cabinet, and from wbat Dear Sir—I thank you for sending me the copies of section of the Dublin Parliament; would sJb-e select them? your pamphlet. I wish it couLd be read generally by th« Would the Dubliu Parliament differ materially from the people of Great Britain, for nothiug better has bee* well-known eighty-six Irish members now sitting in written or published on the Irish question. I read Mr. Westminster? and if not, how many of the men with Bagenal’s book several or some years ago, and I have whose faces and conduct we have been familiar during observed how exactly the revolutionary party and iis the last seven years would be installed as Ministers of leaders have acted on the rules laid down by iir. LaW . the Crown? Look over the names of some of these Mr. Gladstone has changed his mind and his policy, hoi men. Begin with Mr. Parnell, and then go on to there is not the least proof that the revalut»* b«e O'Brien and Dillon and Healy and O’Connor and changed its course or its ultimate objeots. In Amerisa Harrington and Biggar, and possibly we might add to nothing indicates such a change. Mr. Parnell sajm them some of the New York patriots, who collect nothing distinct of it unless at times to obe*t an Eoglisk funds for the Irish revolution, and who now pru­ audience. The old policy is upheld, and the land war dently keep the Atlantic between them and the is urged as violently as ever. Unfortunately the Glad­ Irish Courts of Law. Out of these and such as stone press will not notice your pamphlets. They look these, without doubt, the Queen would have had to to the sale of the papers, and go with what they deem select her confidential advisers. Look at what these men the majority of tneir readers, who are supposed to go have said and done. One of them, and not the least with the caucus. But I hope many will read what you important of them, urges his countrymen to treat as a have written, and I cannot but thauk you for the great leper the man who breaks the order of the Land League. help you have given to a great cause.—Believe me, very He urges in a public manifesto all Irish tenants to refuse sincerely yours, J o h n B r ig h t . the payment of rent, and in a noted speech to Irishmen in America, from whom the main portion of his funds is XXXV.-PARTY IS NOT EVERYTHING. derived, he is reported to have said :—“ When we have given Ireland to the people of Ireland, we shall have The following was written in reply to Mr. B. laid the foundation upon which to build up our Irish S. Bradley, Hands worth, who lamented Mr. nation. And let us not forget that that is the ultimate Bright’s unwillingness to follow Mr. Gladstone’s goal at which all we Irishmen aim. None of us, whether leadership on the Irish question : — we be iu America or in Ireland, will be satisfied until we have destroyed the last link which keeps Ireland bound One Ash, Rochdale, February 13, 1838. to Eugland.” Dear Sir—I thank you for your friendly letter, but you are in error. I did not go with Mr. Chamberlain or If I could «peak to every thoughtful and loyal man in the United Kingdom I would ask him to consider this with any other person to meetings to speak for the matter, not in connection with Mr. Gladstone’s leader­ Tories. I have attended no meetings since my election ship or the overthrow of Lord Salisbury’s Government, in 1886. You evidently think party is everything, and but with something much higher than mere party strife. to keep the Liberal party together and follow your The nation has just celebrated the half-century of the leader. reign of the Queen—they have shown their reverence There are great questions on which leaders and patties for her high station and her noble life, and they are may go wrong. I did uot go with the Liberal party in advised, when a general election takes place, to force 1854-, when they plunged into the war with Russia. I upon her a Miuister whose policy, in regard to Ireland, was then attacked and blamed more thau I am now. I would subject her to the monstrous and intolerable in­ was, it is said, burned in effigy iu Manchester, and soon dignity of selecting her Irish Councillors and Cabinet after lost my seat for that great constituency. But who Ministers from the meu who have given abundant proof now condemns me for the course I then took ? of their disloyalty to the Throne and of a bitter hostility I left Mr. Gladstone’s Government when they bom­ to the people of Great Britain. barded Alexandria and entered into the war iu the Soudan. Who blames me now for my desertion of the What would English and Welsh constituencies think Liberal leader at that time for that cause? The Russian and say if, after returning Mr. Gladstone to power, they War cost more than half a million of human live-. found him surrounding himself with colleagues from the The bombardment of Alexandria and what followed leaders of the Irish Revolutionary party, and yet these cost most probably more than 50,000 lives, most of which men are now as legally qualified to be English as Irish were of men whom, I think, Mr. Gladstone said they ministers. We are asked to deliver the Irish people, of were “ rightly struggling to be free.” Am I to prostrate whom two millions out of less than five millions are myself before a leader in whose great career there are horrified at the prospect, to a party whose entrance into blunders so euormous as those to which I now refer? I an English or a British Cabinet would be likely to am sure your good sense will give a right answer to this produce an immediate insurrection. question. W hat, then, has the Unionist section of the oncc It is said Mr. Gladstone’s Irish Bills are dead. Then honoured and powerful Liberal party doue? It has what arc we oontendiug for ? Has he still the old bills saved the nation from a great peril, and it has saved the in his pocket or has he new ones ? If new ones, why not Sovereign of three kingdoms and of a wide empire from bring them before Parliament or the public for discus­ the ternble indignity to which the passions of a states­ sion ? Are you willing to go on blindfold, happy only to man, aged and most eminent, and the credulity of a follow, and in total ignorance as to where yon are going? rash and unthinking party, would have subjected her. If Mr. Gladstone has made so grievous a blunder less Let us, then, be content with what we have done. The than two years ago in measures which are now universally future will not fail us if we remain firm and true to our condemned, how dare you trust him further in that principles and to our faith.—Sincerely yours, which he studiously conceals from Parliament and th* t T r* , John Bright. country ? J. it. Graham, Esq., Hands worth, Birmingham. 1 am, and always have been, against having two Par- 14 J o h n B r ig h t ’s L e ttk h s o h H om e f t u u i .

Lament* in toe United Kingdom, and so long as the Liberal ana Gladstone policyIs In favour of two Parlia­ XXXVIII.—ON THE MANCHESTER ments I most follow my own Judgment and conscience, “ MARTYRS.” and not the ▼oloe of any partyleader.—Yours very •incerely, J o h n B r ig m t . Mr. Bright’s attention was called to the pro- n ÿ V f j * Gladstonlan meeting held at Huddersfield to welcome Mr. T. D. Sullivan,1 XXXVI.—11 THE FUTURE IS WITH OUR M .l'., and also to certain remarks made bya YOUNG MEN.” local newspaper. J At a meeting of the Liberal Unionist students t w - «• t .1 j ? ue Ash’ Rochdale, April 9, 1888. of Glasgow University, at which it was resolved A y°? f°r y°Ur letter’ aDd f0f the n'aih! V ? °°PI °f ?°Ur Hudd«Sfleld newspaper, to form a Liberal Unionist Club, Mr. Bright was the Daily Examiner, the editor of w hich, I presume is elected to the office of honorary president, and 1 ‘I- PJ? r ^ Parî.iilme"t- Hes’ayiicoudoned he wrote, accepting the position, in the following anîiÎI - Ü iCí Manchester Fenian convicts were terms :— ° ’aT w“£ed to s.ave from the ordinary penalty One Ash, Rochdale, February 28th, 1888. condone is to pardon. The crime was w Dear Sir—I have to thank you for your letter of the one of the gravest character, and in my view deserved 25th, and also desire to thank your Liberal Unionist eavy punishment ; but I have always opposed the punish­ students for the friendly offer you make me on their ment of death as tending rather to create a contempt behalf. or human life than to make it more honoured and more ^ accept the position of honorary president of secure I wished too to avoid adding three more names to your Liberal Unionist Club, and hope your association the list of the criminals who are accepted as martyrs by may be useful in spreading opinions adverse to the wild the revolutionary party by which Ireland was then as it is Ec.iemes now accepted by a large portion of the Liberal now cursed. I urged my case upon the Home Secre­ party, in alliance with the revolutionary conspiracy in tary at the Home Office, but without success. I was Ireland, with the purpose of breaking up the Imperial not aware th at Mr. Swinburne or Mr. Stuart Mill had Parliament. The early future of our country Is with interfered in the matter. I come now to the leaflet and our young men. I hope they ir.ay study the great the song to which you refer, which was sung at a meet­ question before the country, and may judge it wisely.— ing of Liberals on the 24th ult. It is a song written to Yours very sincerely, J o h n B r ig h t . glorify the men guilty of the Fenian outrage and murder Mr. illiatn Brodie, committed in Manchester on the 18th of September, 23, Belhaven Terrace, Glasgow. loo7. I am not sure that the author of the song was not present. At least three members of Parliament are re­ porter! to h a v e been present. One of them, member for XXXVII.—FOR THE GOOD OF THE Huddersfield, was, or is expected to be, or aspires to be, one of the whips of the present Opposition, and of the COUNTRY. new Government which the disappointed and the hungry In reply to Mr. Robert Bird, secretary of theare 80 anxiously looking for. I will not reason with est of Scotland Liberal Unionist Association, the three members or the expectant whip. I know their as to voting for a Conservative, Mr. Bright case, and they know it ; but I may reason not with your wrote ° frantic public meeting but with the thoughtful and moral men, who in former days were many, and who, I One Ash, Rochdale, March 23, 1888. hope, are now not a few among the electors of your Dear Sir—AU I have said is that I should not vote for honoured constituency. Are they prepared to glorify a candidate in favour of Mr. Gladstone’s Irish policy. the aotion in the Fenian outrage of 1867 ? Will they As to anything more, I have advised that a man should join in singing the praises of the men of whom even consult his own judgment and conscience and let them your editor says:—“ They rightly paid the penalty of guide him. I do not wish to be responsible for more the homicide ot which they were guilty” ? Can the than this; there are many Liberals who would think moral and thoughtful men among the Huddersfield it a sin to vote for a Tory. As things are going now I electors rest content to be represented in Parliament by suppose we shall soon become all Conservatives and all the chairman of a meeting where such a song so un­ at the same time Liberals. Such is the conversion among patriotic and so wicked is sung, and be silent and con­ the Government paity; aud I think Liberals should senting? To what depths of degradation and of .as I do ; but I suspect not a few of the ignominy can the Liberal party descend under the •nu onian liberals, and especially the office-seekers alliance now existing between the revolutionaiy party will become unhappy for what is really for the good of the by which Ireland is afflicted.—Yours very truly, country.—Always sincerely yours, J o h n B r ig h t . J o h n B r ig h t . MR. BRIGHT’S ABSOLUTE CONSISTENCY. 1 ^ ,0 may fitly °l0Se With the following extract from theRochdale Star of February At a political meeting in Rochdale the other day it was asserted that Mr. John l u ayerSÍOn ^ ome Rule was the growth of his latter days, but the following letter has been unearthed from Robertson’s life of the late right hon. gentleman. It ears date twenty years ago, January, 1872, proving that at least for seventeen years tn ere was no change in his views. The letter was written to Mr. O’Donoghue. It is said that some persons engaged in the canvass of the county of Kerry*have

• poken . of metrn as an advocate ^ of what is termed Home AW WAV Rule XXX in XI v Ireland. x n u u i JL XIV I hope V llv no v/iiw one • k° 8ay anything so absurd and untrue. If it has been said by anyone of any

I » • I £ I 7 XXKtll vull If xo 11 1U1 In U IT 11/11111 tllv Uimts of the preaent United Kingdom who does not wish the United Kingdom to become mor0 nations, entirety separated from each other. Excuse me for troubling.you ■mw*-118- 110 mine to interfere in your contest, but I do ççt wish to bt INDEX

No * _ pA0 I.—A One-Man Policy _ •M K«. ••• <•. ••• >•• ••• *5 II.—Abject Partisanship IM ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ^ III. —Error or Patriotism ? ••• ••• • ••• • ••• ••• 5 IV .—Mr. Bright and Mr. Gladstone ...... ••• ••• 3 V .—1866 and 1886...... ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ••• ^ VI.—Idolatry is not Liberalism ...... 4 VII,— Mr. Gladstone Lost to Moderation ...... ^ V III.—On Irish Industry ...... 5 IX .—The Parnellite C onspiracy...... 5 X .—Remember the Two Million Loyalists ...... 5 XI.—Why the “ Majority” Must Not Prevail ...... 5 X II.—An Impracticable P l a n ...... 6 X III.—The Crimes Bill Necessary...... & XIV.—“ Parnellism and Crime” ...... 6 XV.—The Humiliation of the Liberal Party ...... 6 X V I.—Mr. Gladstone and Ulster ...... XVII.—A Reply to Mr. Gladstone...... ? X V III.—“ I Have Not Changed” ...... 1 X IX .—The Chiefs of a Conspiracy ...... & XX.—On Sir George Trevelyan ...... • 8 XXI.—Mr. Gladstone Perverts Irish H istory ...... 6 XXII.—A Real Friend of Ireland ...... & XXIII.—When Force is a R em ed y ...... 9 XXIV.—Mr. Parnell the Connecting Link ...... $ XXV.—W hat Mr. Bright Thought of Compulsory Land Purchase...... 10 X X V I.—An “ Infamous Leaflet” ...... 10 X X V II.—Attitude on Coercion ...... 11 X X V III.—The Conspiracy—Half Irish and Half A m erican...... 11 X X IX .—“ I Support Lord Salisbury Against Mr. P arn ell” ...... 11 XXX.—Sympathy with Ruffians ...... 12 X X X I.—The Wild Policy of Mr. Gladstone ...... 1 2 X X X II.—Honesty, Industry, Temperance, and T hiift ...... 12 X X X III.—“ Supposing the Home Rule Bill had Passed” ...... 12 XXXIV.—The Old Revolution Under a Mask...... 13 XXXV.—Party is Not Everything ...... 13 XXX V I.—“ The Future is W ith Our Youns M en” ...... 14 XXXVII.—For the Good of the Country ...... 14 XXXVIII.—On the Manchester “ Martyrs” ...... 14 Statue- of Mr. JohnB rvjlit.

PlUNTKD UY THE BIRMINGHAM DAILY GAZETTE COMPANY, LIMITED, 52 AND 53, HlGH STREET BIRMINGHAM, To ‘whom apjilication forprice,fee., should t be made.