[103] See pp. 22-31, ante.

[104] ’But who proposed that Ireland should be anything else than an integral part of the United Kingdom (Ministerial cheers), or rather of the Empire?’ (Opposition cheers).—­Mr. Sexton, April 20, 1893, Times Parliamentary Debates, p. 522.  The confusion of ideas and the hesitation implied in Mr. Sexton’s expressions are noteworthy.

[105] England adhered with absolute fidelity to her renunciation of the right to legislate for Ireland.  Whatever were the other flaws in the Treaty of Union, it was no violation either of 22 Geo. III. c. 63, or of 23 Geo. III. c. 28.  The worst features of the method by which the Act of Union was carried would have been avoided had the English Parliament resumed the right to legislate for Ireland.  The Treaty of Union depends on Acts both of the British and of the Irish Legislature.  This is elementary but has escaped the attention of Mr. Sexton (see Times Parliamentary Debates, Feb. 13, 1893, p. 319), whose investigations into the history of his country are apparently recent.

[106] “The plan that was to be proposed was to be such as, at least in the judgment of its promoters, presented the necessary characteristics—­I will not say of finality, because it is a discredited word—­but of a real and continuing settlement.”—­Mr. Gladstone, Feb. 13, 1893, Times Parliamentary Debates, p. 303.

[107] See Mr. Gladstone’s Irish Constitution, Contemporary Review, May, 1886, p. 616.

CHAPTER IV

PLEAS FOR THE NEW CONSTITUTION

Gladstonians when pressed with the manifest objections to which the new constitution is open rely for its defence either upon general considerations intended to show that the criticisms on the new constitution are in themselves futile, or upon certain more or less specific arguments, of which the main object is to establish that the policy of Home Rule is either necessary or at least free from danger, and that, therefore, this policy and the new constitution in which it is to be embodied deserve a trial.

My object in this chapter is to examine with fairness the value both of these general considerations and of these specific arguments.

The general considerations are based upon the alleged prophetic character of the criticisms on the new constitution or upon the anomalies to be found in the existing English constitution.

Ministerialists try to invalidate strictures on the Home Rule Bill, such as those set forth in the foregoing pages, by the assertion that the objections are mere prophecy and therefore not worth attention.