An incident which occurred towards the end of the session seems, though trifling in itself, so illustrative of the illogical position in which we stood towards Ireland, as to deserve mention.  Mr. Forster, still Chief Secretary, had brought in a Bill for extinguishing the Queen’s University in Ireland, and creating in place of it a body to be called the Royal University, which, however, was not to be a real university at all, but only a set of examiners plus some salaried fellowships, to be held at various places of instruction.  Regarding this as a gross educational blunder, which would destroy a useful existing body, and create a sham university in its place, and finding several Parliamentary friends on whose judgment I could rely to be of the same opinion, I gave notice of opposition to the Bill.  Mr. Forster came to me, and pressed with great warmth that the opposition should be withdrawn.  The Bill, he said, would satisfy the Roman Catholic hierarchy, and complete the work of the Land Bill in pacifying Ireland.  The Irish members wanted it:  what business had an English member to interfere to defeat their wishes, and thwart the Executive?  The reply was obvious.  Not to speak of the simplicity of expecting the hierarchy to be satisfied by this small concession, what were such arguments but the admission of Home Rule in its worst form?  “You resist the demand of the Irish members to legislate for Ireland; you have just been demanding, and obtaining, the support of English members against those amendments of the Land Bill which Irish members declare to be necessary.  Now you bid us surrender our own judgment, ignore our own responsibility, and blindly pass a Bill which we, who have studied these university questions as they affect both Ireland and England, believe to be thoroughly mischievous to the prospects of higher education in Ireland, only because the Irish members, as you say, desire it.  Do one thing or the other.  Either give them the power and the responsibility, or leave both with the Imperial Parliament.  You are now asking us to surrender the power, but to remain still subject to the responsibility.  We will not bear the latter without the former.  We shall prefer Home Rule.”  Needless to add that this device—­a sample of the petty sops by which successive generations of English statesmen, Whigs and Tories alike, have sought to win over a priesthood which uses and laughs at them—­failed as completely as its predecessors to settle the University question or to range the bishops on the side of the Government.

The autumn and winter of 1881 revealed the magnitude of the mischief done by making a Coercion Bill precede a Relief Bill.  The Land Bill was the largest concession made to the demands of the people since Catholic Emancipation.  It was a departure, justified by necessity, but still a departure from our established principles of legislation.  It ought to have brought satisfaction and confidence, if not gratitude, with