[100] ’But all these matters are, as it were, minor details.  They all sink into comparative insignificance before the one great demand—­and I almost apologise for mentioning them—­because I want you to concentrate your attention on the one great demand which we make, and the one unalterable statement we intend to adhere to, that whether guilty or innocent, these men, according to their lights and their consciences, were trying to serve Ireland; that any of them who were guilty were driven into this course by the misgovernment of Ireland, and the oppression of Ireland by an outside power, and that if we are asked to settle this Irish question, if we are asked to let peace reign where discord and hatred reign at present, there must be no victims—­that if there is to be peace there must also be amnesty.  I don’t discuss the question of guilt or innocence.  For the sake of argument I will say that there are some men in jail who are guilty.  They must come out as well as the innocent, because their guilt is due to misgovernment in the past.’—­Mr. Pierce Mahony, Irish Independent, April 5.  See ’Notes on the Bill,’ p. 423.

’There is no use in deceiving ourselves upon this matter; we would be fools if we thought that in the next few weeks, or within the next few months, we would succeed in getting our brethren out of prison.  I don’t believe we will; ... but I am convinced of this, that there is not a man amongst them who will ever be called upon to serve anything like the remainder of his sentence.  I am convinced that in a short time—­and the extent of its duration depends upon other circumstances—­every one of these men will be restored to liberty if only we conduct this agitation with determination, with resolution, and I would say above all with moderation and with wisdom.’—­Mr. John Redmond, M.P., Dublin Irish Independent, April 5.  See ‘Notes on the Bill,’ p. 424.

[101] See Mill, Representative Government, 1st ed. p. 300.

[102] Of course I do not for a moment dispute the legal right of Parliament to repeal all or any of the articles of the Treaty of Union with Ireland.  I am writing now not upon the law, but upon the ethics of the constitution.  My contention is, that, as things stand, the undoubted assent of Great Britain (or even perhaps of England, in the narrower sense) is morally requisite for the repeal or at any rate for the remodelling of the Treaty of Union.  Note that Ireland would stand morally and logically in a stronger position if demanding Separation than when demanding a revision of the Act of Union.  An example shows my meaning. A, B, and C form a partnership. A is by far the richest, and C by far the poorest of the firm. C finds the terms of partnership onerous.  He may have a moral right to retire, but certainly he cannot have a moral, and would hardly under any system of law have a legal, right to say, ’I do not want to leave the firm, but I insist that the terms of partnership be remodelled wholly in my favour.’  Nor again is it conceivable that B and C by uniting together could in fairness claim to impose upon A disadvantages the burden of which he had never intended to accept.