a most impressible age he reads for the first time the history of his country, and burns with indignant desire to avenge her many wrongs.  The consequences are patent to all.  It is, then, for the advantage of England, as well as of Ireland, that Irish history should be made the earliest study of Irish youth; nor is it of less importance that Irish history should be thoroughly known by Englishmen.  It is the duty of every Englishman who has a vote to give, to make himself acquainted with the subjects on which his representative will give, in his name, that final decision which makes his political opinion the law of the land.  I suppose no one will deny that the Irish Question is the question of the day.  The prosperity of England, as well as the prosperity of Ireland, is involved in it.  No educated man, however humble his station, has a right to assist in returning a member to Parliament without clearly comprehending the principles of his representative.  But unless he has some comprehension of the principles themselves, it is of little use for him to record his vote.  I do not say that every English voter is bound to study Irish history in detail, but I do say that, at the present day, he is bound to know what the Irish themselves demand from England; and if he considers their demands reasonable, he should record his vote only for those who will do their utmost to obtain the concessions demanded.  A man is unworthy of the privilege of voting, if he is deficient either in the intellect or the inclination to understand the subject on which he votes.

But it is of still more importance that members of Parliament should read—­and not only read, but carefully study—­the history of Ireland.  Irishmen have a right to demand that they shall do so.  If they undertake to legislate for us, they are bound in conscience and in honour to know what we require, to know our past and our present state.  Englishmen pride themselves on their honour; but it is neither honorable to undertake to govern without a thorough knowledge of the governed, or to misrepresent their circumstances to others whose influence may decide their future.

It was manifest from the speech of her Majesty’s minister, on the night of the all-important division on the Irish Church question, that he either had not studied Irish history, or that he had forgotten its details.  If his statements are correctly reported by the press, they are inconceivably wild.  It may be said that the circumstances in which he found himself obliged him to speak as he did, but is this an excuse worthy of such an honorable position?  The Normans, he is reported to have said, conquered the land in Ireland, but in England they conquered completely.  The most cursory acquaintance with Irish history would have informed the right honorable gentleman, that the Normans did not conquer the land in Ireland—­no man has as yet been rash enough to assert that they conquered the people.  The Normans obtained possession of a small portion,