[Sidenote:  A solemn peroration.]

Finally, there came a peroration—­lofty, almost inspired—­splendidly delivered, rapturously applauded.  It rang out a note of perfect confidence—­of early and complete victory—­of righteous trust in a righteous cause.  And the House which had followed the great orator in rapt attention so long could not tire of cheering this glowing and inspiring end.  For several minutes the cheers were given—­and again given, and again.  Meantime, poor Mr. Courtney had been standing—­waiting for silence.  To him had been entrusted the task of moving the rejection of the measure.  He was dull, pedantic, and rather embarrassed after this great effort of Mr. Gladstone, and the House emptied.  There was a certain stir of curiosity as the name of “Mr. Disraeli” was called by the Speaker; and then the bearer of one of the greatest names of our times, stood up.  His speech was brightish, cleverish, and yet there was something wanting.  Mr. Redmond was critical, cautious, severe on the financial clauses, but finally pronounced for the Bill.  And so we started the first day of final debate on the Home Rule Bill.

[Sidenote:  The last lap.]

There was no doubt about it; the House was thoroughly jaded, and it would have been beyond the power of the most Demosthenic orator to rouse it to anything like enthusiasm.  Several of the speeches throughout the following evening were of a high order; but still there was no response—­it was speaking from a rock to the noisy, unlistening, and irresponsive sea.  The night of September 1st began with a brief, graceful, finely-phrased and finely-tempered speech by Mr. Justin McCarthy, which confirmed Mr. Dillon’s frank expression of the Bill as a final measure of emancipation to the Irish people.  The obvious sincerity of the speaker—­the high character he has, his long consistency, and, above all, the sense of his thorough unselfishness, procured for Mr. McCarthy a respectful and even a sympathetic hearing from all parts of the House, and he had an audience silent, attentive, and admiring.

[Sidenote:  Joe’s parting bolt.]

The contrast between the kindliness, the sincere judgment, and the kindly disposition of Mr. McCarthy and the somewhat raucous and malevolent accents of Mr. Chamberlain, was very marked.  Not that Mr. Chamberlain was by any means so nasty as usual; it looked as if he had been taught by the failure of his last utterance into learning at last that malevolence in the end defeats itself by its very excess, and he evidently had resolved to put a very severe restraint upon himself, and attuned his oratory to a very minor key.  But this new tone was just as unsuccessful as the other, and there is a second unsuccessful and flat speech to be put to his credit.  Many of the ideas, many of the phrases, were repetitions of things he had already said a hundred times over in the course of the previous debates; in short, the speech was a revelation of the fact, known to those who have watched