In this there was a genuine expression of the desire which governed his whole conduct in the Convention, to get away from the old lines with their old traditional antagonisms, and refer the solution not to Irish politicians but to Ireland as a whole.  What followed in his speech gave positive development to the self-denying ordinance which he had proposed for the party machines.  He asked for a nominated element—­first, to make sure that men obviously suitable, who none the less might not happen to be elected, should find a place:  and secondly, to increase still further the Unionist representation.

He added once more a plea for quick action; dilatoriness had had much to do, he said, with the Government’s late failures in Ireland.  But, if prompt steps were taken on the path outlined, he would, in spite of all that had come and gone, face the new venture with good heart.  Yet even in his confidence there was the pathetic accent of one who feels need to bid defiance to despair.

“Although I know I lay myself open perhaps to ridicule as too sanguine a prophet, I have some assured hope that the result may be blessed for Ireland as for the Empire. ...  The life of a politician, especially of an Irish politician, is one long series of postponements and compromises and disappointments and disillusions....  Many of our cherished ideals, our ideals of complete, speedy and almost immediate triumph of our policy and of our cause, have faded, some of them almost disappeared.  And we know that it is a serious consideration for those of us who have spent forty years at this work and now are growing old, if we have to face further postponements.  For my part, I feel we must not shrink from compromise.  If by this Convention which is now proposed we can secure substantial agreement amongst our people in Ireland, it will be worth all the heartburnings and postponements and disappointments and disillusions of the last thirty or forty years.”

The omens were not favourable to this storm-beaten courage.  When he sat down, Sir John Lonsdale rose to reiterate on behalf of the Ulster Unionists that they “could not and would not be driven into a Home Rule Parliament”—­and that they relied absolutely on the pledges that they should not be coerced.  Mr. William O’Brien followed.  After years of advocating settlement by conference among Irishmen, he condemned this proposal as coming six or seven years too late, and as defective in its machinery, in that it proposed a large body of men:  “A dozen Irishmen of the right stamp” would be the proper Conference; and the proposal of partition should be barred out in advance.  If the experiment were tried now and failed, the failure would “kill any reasonable hope in our time of reconstructing the constitutional movement upon honest lines.”  Ireland is always fruitful in Cassandras who do not lack power to assist in the fulfilment, of their ill-bodings, and this speech foreshadowed Mr. O’Brien’s intention to abstain.  Sir Edward Carson and Mr. Devlin gave the debate a more promising tone:  but it was difficult for anybody to be sanguine.