« PreviousContinue »
life, and of her own accord made good resolutions for the future, which she carried out when awake; and the improvement in her conduct and character was permanent. Two years later M. Voisin wrote that she was a nurse in a Paris hospital, and that her conduct was irreproachable.
This is, we are told, an unusual but not a unique case. Dr. Mason would apply similar treatment in cases of mental deficiencies, evil habits, and vicious tendencies, shown in childhood or youth.
There will probably be greater readiness on the part of the public to entertain these proposals of educational hypnotism when our hypnotisers become saints or our saints turn hypnotisers. A high state of habitual and elevated self-control is a condition without which control over others should never be allowed.
UNIONISTS AND CHURCHMEN.
THREAT OF AN “INDEPENDENT PARTY." “A LAYMAN," writing in the National Review, delivers his soul of a bitter complaint against the Unionist Party for its treatment of the Church in the last Session of Parliament. Churchmen had jubilant hopes from the triumphant majority they had largely helped to return to power. But alas! “For the Church of England the Government did nothing,-nothing except (to be studiously accurate) the passage of a Bill to alter the boundaries of the diocese of Bristol.” The fate of the Benefices Bill, and above all of the Education Bill, leads the writer to what he feels to be the irresistible conclusion" that the greater part both of the Government and of the party are indifferent to the interests of the Church and to the wishes of Churchmen.” This plaiut is pathetically repeated again and again. “There seems to be a large body of opinion in the Unionist Government and Party indifferent to religious Government." The financial clauses of the Education Bill and its collapse suggest to the aggrieved writer that the Government “ belong, at present at any rate, to that baser class of insolvents who promise a percentage and pay nothing !” No doubt, he grants, Unionists oppose Disendowment, but apart from this negative aid, “Unionist friendship seems to become a very insignificant sentiment." And let not Unionists imagine that the dread of Disendowment will always ensure the support of Churchmen :
Such calculations do not take account of the feelings of a section of the younger and more ardent clergy. To them Disendlowment has no horrors; and Disestablishment has considerable attractions. As yet they are not, in most cases, supporters of either, but they do not care so greatly that they may not come to think it is possible to sacrifice too much for the establishment. The opinions of a number of clergy, moreover, on general politics quite divergent from Conservatism. Some members of the Christian Social Union, who are strong not, indeed, in intellectual force, but in their zeal and in their high personal standard of virtue and piety, favour much which Conservatives regard as socialistic. Evidently a few more Sessions like the last would suffice to alienate from the Unionists the support such men have sometimes given to them as the friends of the Church.
The threat of secession with which the article began is renewed. “ Even the extreme course of forming an Independent Party, which would divide the strength of Unionists at elections, might not be impossible.” This menace-which if meant seriously would be welcome news to Liberals and Liberationists-is evidently intended to spur on the Government to more practical devotion to the Church. The conclusion of the whole matter is, “Let us grumble to-day, that we may be spared the temptation of revolting to-morrow.”
unfounded, but none the less dangerous, misrepresentation ; namely, that their action was inspired not so much by love of non-Board, as by hatred of Board Schools. It ought to be made perfectly clear that the policy to be followed is one of equal treatment all round, and that simple justice to nonBoard Schools is not only compatible with, but essential to similar justice to Board Schools.
PLAN FOR A NEW COUNTY AUTHORITY. The second point is the formation of a ne v e lucation au" ority. The Education Department which Liberals profess to admire most highly is not, Mr. Diggle reminds thein, an elected body. His own scheme is also nonelective:
There is no reason to doubt but that a county education authority formed out of existing local authorities, e.g., the County or District or City Councils, the School Boards, the Councils of Federated non-Board Schools, representatives of institutions giving Secondary or University Education, &c., would furnish a more popular and effective authority than any which now exists. The principle of the formation of such composite educational bodies is not a novel and untried principle. It is simply the extension to a wider area, and to more complex interests, of the habitual practice of the Charity Commissioners which is uniformly approved by Parliamentary Banctions.
ORDINARY TEACHERS AND RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION. The third point is evidently the difficulty of religious teaching, concerning which Mr. Diggle emits the following oracular sentences :
In the third place, there is no necessity to endanger the harmonious working of every public elementary school by introducing into the schools, for a specific purpose, a new class of teachers, not appointed by the local minagers, but by some outside persons or authority. The frank recognition of parental rights in the matter of religious education imposes upon the managers of schools the corresponding obligation to safeguard those rights and to give effect to them in the ordinary conduct of the school. But it is essential to the proper and effective conduct of the school that the orilinary teachers should be competent to give the full recognised instruction of the school. This is the method a opt:d in industrial schools, and it is equally applicable to ordinary schools. The London School Board tind no difficulty in a dipting a so-called undenominational system to the denominational requirements of the Jews, and there is no reason whya denominational system should not be equally flexible in the case of the undenominationalists.
EDUCATION BY HYPNOTISM. DR. R. Osgood Mason writes in the North American Review for October on “ The Educational Uses of Hypnotism.” He quotes a striking instance of education-one might almost say conversion--brought about by hypnotic action :
In the summer of 1881 there was at the Salpêtrière a young woman of a deplorable type--a criminal lmatic, filthy in habits and violent in demeanour, and with a life-long history of impurity and theft. M. Auguste Voisin, one of the physicians of the hospital staff, uudertook to hypnotise her at a time when she could be kept quiet only by the straitjacket and the continuous cold douche to the head. She would not look at the operator, but raved and spat at him. M. Voisin, however, kept his face close to hers, and followed her eyes wherever she moved them. In ten minutes she was asleep, and in five minutes more she passed into the sleepwalking or somnambulic state, and began to talk incoherently. This treatment being repeated on miny succi.ssive days, she gradually became sane when in the hypnotic condition, though she still raved when awake. At length she came to obey in her waking hours commands impressed upon her in her trance ----trivial matters, such as to sweep her room-then suggestions involving marked changes in her behaviour; finally, in the hypnotic state, she voluntarily expressed regret for her past
LORD ROSEBERY. VARIOUS VIEWS OF His POLICY AND CHARACTER. LORD ROSEBERY’s resignation of the Liberal leadership naturally suggests many articles in this month's Reviews. The Fortnightly publishes “Lord Rosebery's Second Thoughts” by “ Diplomaticus,” and “Lord Rosebery's Presignation," by Mr. Edward Dicey.
BY “ DIPLOMATICUS.” The article by“ Diplomaticus"attacks Lord Rosebery's policy in dealing with the Eastern Question. He goes over the old ground, generally accusing the Liberal Prime Minister of ignorance of the conditions of the problem with which he had to deal, especially of ignoring the drift of Russian policy. He makes one point against him, namely, that in which he contrasts Lord Rosebery's recent warning against Italian action with the assurance which he gave to Lord Salisbury when he went to the office that he would have the support of the nation, even if he took united action. “Circumstances alter cases," Lord Rosebery would reply, and isolated action which might have been somewhat safe in 1895 might be midsummer madness in 1896. The only new thing in “Diplomaticus's” article is that in which he declares that Lord Rosebery missed the chance of doing anything for Armenia when he refused to join Russia, France and Germany in intervening on behalf of China against Japan. Prince Lobanoff, “ Diplomaticus” saysaccordingly made overtures to the British Government to join in an intervention in China, with a view to keeping Japan off the Asiatic mainland. I understand that he intimated to Lord Rosebery that he might make almost his own terms for the support demanded of him. Never had a British Minister a more splendid opportunity of achieving a great coup. Had he seen clearly at that moment, or if seeing clearly had he acted with courage, the Eastern Question would have been settled to-day. Under these circumstances there was no Power or combination of Powers to say him nay. He adopted neither of these courses, but simply peddled away at his scheme of reforms in the infatuated belief that, as soon as it was completed, the Sultan would adopt it, or British gunboats would know the reason why.
This may be true, or it may not; but there is a further question, namely, as to how far the responsibility for refusing to co-operate with Russia was due to Lord Rosebery or to his colleagues ? A very persistent rumour at the time had it that Lord Rosebery almost wrecked his Cabinet by the vehemence with which he pressed his recalcitrant colleagues to embark upon the intervention to which Prince Lobanoff invited him.
By Mr. E. DICEY. Mr. Edward Dicey, writing upon “Lord Rosebery's Resignation” in the same Review, has very little to say that is new. Speaking of Lord Rosebery, he says :
After all, he contrived to keep the Liberals in power for a year-and-a-half after Mr. Gladstone's retirement, and to have done so is an achievement no other Liberal Premier could have accomplished.
He does not think that Lord Rosebery's career as a Minister, or even as a Prime Minister, is necessarily at an end. He may or may not be a great statesman. In all times and all countries great statesmen are very few in number. But his lordship has many of the qualities which, in such a country as ours, enable a man to play a very high and even brilliant part in public life. Apart from his advantages of rank, repute, and fortune, he possesses a cool head, a sound judgment, a knowledge of the world, a faculty of lucid and telling statement, a gift of writing, and above all a keen understanding of the British public, of its prejudices, its likes and dislikes, its aims, ambitions, convictions and aspirations. Given these advantages and these qualities, and Lord Rosebery
might well be excused for applying to himself the remark of Mr. Cecil Rhodes after his resignation of the Cape Premiership. and of saying “my political career is not ended but only beginning." But if this anticipation is to be justified by events Lord Rosebery must take his stand on one side or the other.
Therefore, as Mr. Dicey is a Liberal Unionist, he considers that Lord Rosebery ought to stand where Mr. Dicey does. He concludes his article as follows:
I would respectfully say to the late leader of the Liberal party, your place is not temporarily only, but permanently, in the ranks of those who uphold the rights of property, individual liberty, freedom of contract, the maintenance of the Union, and the Imperial mission of the British Empire; in the ranks, and the Imperial mission to put the matter more concisely, of the Conservatives, not of the Liberals.
“A MERE CRITIC.” In the Progressive Review for November, the editor deems it the best way to promote the cause of Liberalism by publishing a carping criticism of Lord Rosebery, of whom he finds it difficult to say one good word, with the exception of the following guarded admission as to his critical abilities :
We do not deny for one moment Lord Rosebery's powers as a critic, and never was his critical ability seen to greater advantage than in his recent able Edinburgh speech. “But a good critic is usually a bad leader, especially where human and moral considerations are involved, and the specific charge against Lord Rosebery through his whole career is that ercepting in organising jingo expeditions, he has invariably appeared in the guise of a mere critic.
The chief contention of the writer is that the choice of Lord Rosebery's successor must be made by a vote of the whole party :
As to leadership;, it w
As to leadership, it would be criminal folly for genuine Liberals to keep silence now. The essential point is this : the disastrous experiment of 1894 must never be repeated. Had Lord Rosebery been a ten times stronger man than he has proved to be, his career would have been vitiated ab initio from the manner of his appointment. A party which professes to be democratic must elect its leader in the best way actual conditions will permit. For a leader to be chosen by the outgoing Prime Minister and the Queen, aided by a cabal of selfinterested political intriguers, is fatal to the peace, union, and dignity of a party, especially of a soi disant party of progress. The first duty, therefore, of the Liberal party is to provide for the formal election by the party of its chief, and to set its heel once for all on private nominations and back-stairs intrigues.
By “A CONSERVATIVE M.P." "A Conservative M.P.," writing in the National Review, greatly exults in the Liberal divisions made evident by Lord Rosebery's resignation. He recalls the fact that twelve occupants of the Liberal Front Bench attended Lord Rosebery's Edinburgh meeting and voted for his return to the Leadership. He specially remarks on Mr. Asquith's expressed conviction that Lord Rosebery was “ the only fit successor to Mr. Gladstone.” He concludes that “these eminent Radicals” do not wish to see Sir William Harcourt leader of their party. How then, he asks, can the tactics of the Opposition be harmonious, even with the leadership left in suspense ? In any case, Lord Rosebery weighs more with the country than any other of the Radical chiefs—as witness the effect of his speech on Armeniaand if on the eve of a General Election he were to insist on his conversion-of-the-predominant-partner line of argument on Home Rule, would not he shiver the party into such equally opposing fragments that only the polls could readjust? However that may be,“ the most sanguine of Radicals cannot deny that the present detachment of Lord Rosebery will help to discredit what may be
termed Gladstonianism and tend to strengthen many Unionist principles."
DISAPPEARANCE OF THE LIBERAL PARTY. Blackwood is naturally very jubilant on the subject. Lord Rosebery's retirement has simplified the general political issues.
There is no longer any halting-place between Conservatives and Destructives, and it may be that Lord Rosebery's appreciation of this truth had something to do with his retirement. But, however this may be, the Radicals represent a young, vigorous, and earnest party, monopolising all the vitality and energy which still remains to the Opposition; and they are led by a patrician demagogue of the type of Wilkes, Burdett, and Duncombe, men who regard the interests of their own order, and even their own fortunes, as a feather in the scale when weighed against the immediate calls of personal ambition-political gamblers, in fact, by which name Burke describes them. This is the party of the future, with whom the Conservatives will have to cope.
On the contrary, there was, as indeed there still is, a strong disinclination to take him seriously as a statesman; and it may be that one reason for the respect with which he was known to regard Lord Beaconsfield is to be sought for in his consciousness of a certain resemblance in their histories ... His rise, in fact, has borne in many respects a curious resemblance to that of the object of his admiration. He had “ views” like Disraeli and the Disraelian readiness of satirical speech, and the same controversial "joy of battle.” If he had not Disraeli's brilliant literary gift he could wield the pen of the pamphleteer with undeniable vigour and effect. And people believed just as much or as little in the depth of his convictions and the soundness of the views which he undertook to advocate. “Historicus” was recognised as a formidable disputant on points of international law-in a newspaper ... The impression prevailed and became ineffaceable that Sir William Harcourt was ... a lawyer of the “elegant” rather than of the profound order; and much the same suspicion of superficiality attached to his political convictions..... Sir William Harcourt has never shared, as indeed no
ambitious politician can afford to share, the perverse attachment of Cato to the losing cause. He has never been ashamed to display that preference for the winning side, in which, according to the Latin poet, he has at least the companionship of the gods to keep him in countenance.
His one unfortunate phrase was about his opponents “stewing in their Parnellite juice.” But Mr. Traill allows that Sir William has made himself not only useful, but indispensable to his party. There was no one among his Gladstonian comrades who could for a moment challenge comparison with him as a debater.
He is a parliamentary strategist and tactician of the first force. In a word he has proved by the acknowledgment of both friend and foe, that he is a leader who can really lead, and there is an ever-growing conviction among his party that he is the only one of their leaders who can.
THE CRISIS IN SOUTH AFRICA. per
Two VIEWS FROM THE Two
THE two old-established quarterlies From the Westminster Budget.]
[October 16, 1896. deliver judgment on the question raised THE TWINS WHO DIDN'T.
by the Jameson raid. “ It has been a most uncomfortable cradle--not nearly room enough for both of us.”
I.—THE CASE OF THE UITLANDERS.
The Quarterly Review, in an article on " The old Liberalism is effete." The new Liberalism the Boers and the Uitlanders, speaks with no uncertain is Radicalism and nothing else. And Blackwood fer- sound. It says : vently desires that “the slippery compromise yeleped
Putting aside all national prepossessions and prejudices, Liberalism” will “disappear from our vocabulary."
there seems to be only one possible solution of the Boer-Uitlander Though the working classes, as a whole, are by no means controversy. In the end the race which is strongest in numbers, a Radical preserve, there is “a powerful residuum pre in wealth, in intelligence, and in energy, must win the day. pared to support a social and political revolution to the The ultimate triumph of the Uitlanders is a matter of almost last cartridge." But men are beginning to understand mathematical certainty. There can be no rest in the Transvaal that our party conflicts are only part of the great till Uitlanders and Boers are given equal rights; until there struggle between the rival principles, on the one hand
is rest in the Transvaal, there can be no peace in South of "authority, subordination, religion, property, law,
Africa. It is the interest therefore, as well as the duty, order," and on the other of “the negation of all
of the Imperial Government to make the settlement of
the Boer-Uitlander difficulty the dominant principle of our these."
South African policy. Towards this end their efforts should HARCOURT-A LIBERAL DISRAELI.
be steadily concentrated, for upon its settlement is staked Mr. H. D. Traill contributes to the Contemporary a the question whether the Dutch or British elements are to rather caustic character-sketch of Sir William Harcourt. predominate in South Africa. From this conclusion we can "From the first," says the writer, “ Sir William has
see no escape. never been credited with any remarkable gifts of states But the Quarterly Reviewer goes further. He defends manship.”
and apologises for the Uitlanders whose abortive rising
had such disastrous consequences. He says they may plead two causes in justification :
The first of these causes was to be found in the apprehension on the part of the Uitlanders that grave immediate danger to their vital interests was imminent at the period when the Reform Committee gave the signal for action. The second of these causes was the expectation on their part that this action would meet with such support from without as to render success probable, if not certain. It remains to indicate what was the general character of these apprehensions and these exnectations.
It was the well-nigh universal belief in Johannesburg towards the close of last year, that the Government of Pretoria was endeavouring to obtain foreign aid, so as to render in possible any attempt on the part of the Uitlanders to assert their rights by action, and to prevent any possible intervention on the part of their fellow-countrymen in South Africa or of the Mother Country. We may hope, even if we do not expect, that the researches of the impending Commission of Enquiry will throw some light on the truth or falsehood of this belief. But, in order to form a fair opinion as to the action of the Uitlanders, the question to be considered is not 80 much whether their belief was correct, as whether they had reasonable cause for so believins. We cannot but think that this question must be answered in the affirmative. The Government of Pretoria during the year 1895 had done every thing, short of repudiating the Treaty of Pretoria, to encourage the impression that the Republic was looking to Germany for support against Great Britain. The German, in contradistinction to the British Uitlanders, were treated on the footing of the most favoured pation. Exceptional facilities were given to German manufacturers in preference to British. Couces. sions were refused by the State to British speculators and accorded to Germaus. Negotiations were reported to be carried on between Pretoria and Berlin by the Secretary of State, Dr. Leyds, the most Anglophobe of Boers; and, according to current report, steps were being taken to organise a foreign legion, commanded by German officers, and composed of German emigrants who had just completed their terms of military service. Plans, too, were said to be ripe for building fortifications, not only at Preto ia but at Johannesburg. Now, as subsequent events demonstrated, the idea which underlay the scheme of an armed demonstration on the part of the litlanders was based on the assumption that the volunteer forces which the Reform Committee hoped to raise would be strong enough to hold their own against the Boers, until such time as assistance could be rendered by the British colonists in the Cape and in Natal. Obviously this idea would become impracticable if once the Government of Pretoriu had in its service a trained body of European troops. If, therefore, an armed demonstration was to be made at all, no time was to be lost.
The second cause which, in the opinion of the Uitlan lers. militated in favour of immediate action, was the expectation that the proposed demonstration would meet with prompt and effective support from without. It is an important fact, bearing on the future development of the Boer-Uitlander controversy, that the belief prevalent throughout the Randt is that if Dr. Jameson had succeeded in effecting his entrance into Johannesburg at the head of his troops, the whole position of affairs would have been changed. We have no means of either disputing or contirming the truth of this impression.
II.—That Good DIR. CHAJBERLIIN. · The Edinburgh Review, in an article on the “ Ministry and the Country," empties its wash-bowl of adulation over the sacred head of the consistent Mr. Chamberlain :--
Mr. Chamberlain has been consistent from first to last. The first thing he had to do was to stop, if possible, the raid, te lisavow it, and put the offenders on their trial; and these things he endeavoured to do and did. At the same time he has always declared that the raid, though the most striking incident f tre situation, was not the whole nor the principal difficulty he had to deal with; and he has never allowed
himself to be diverted, by a desire to obtain punishment for those who deserved it, from the great end of once more drawing together the feelings of Englishmen and Dutchmen so rudely shaken, not only in the Transvaal, but through the whole of Cape Colony. As regards Mr. Rbodes and the Company, the Secretary of State declared his intention as soon as the suspicious nature of the transactions had come out. Till the raiders were tried he would not authorise an investigation which would bear upon their case. As soon as that was over a searching investigation should be held into the complicity of the Chartered Company and its officials, and accordingly on the day of the conviction of Dr. Jameson Mr. Chamberlain moved for the appointment of a Committee of the House of Commons to make a searching examination into the conduct of the Company. Whether Mr. Rhodes will treat that Committee with more respect than the Committee of the Cape Parliament, and appear before it remains to be seen. The evidence collected at the Cape tells a very different story of the whole inception and preparation of the raid from that which was for long curre it in England. It is clear that the conspiracy had been long and deliberately planned by those who held positions of authority and of trust; that fraud had been practised upon the Governor, the representative of the Queen in the Colony; and that every means had been taken by the preparation of false intelligence to deceive public opinion at home. It is charitable to suppose that most of those who still apologise for the raid, and treat the offence of the raiders as a mere technical crime, which as a matter of policy it was necessary to punish, have failed to make themselves acquainted with the true facts of the case. Upon the evidence now made public, the planning of the raid is seen to have been an unscrupulous and fraudulent proceeding It entailed (as was fully contemplated) the deaths of a number of perfectly innocent persons. It was the direct cause of the miserable native war which is not vet at an end. It brought Great Britain and the German Empire within a measurable distance of war, and has had a most unfortunate effect in s'raining the relations of the two Powirs at a time when it is eminently desirable that hearty cordialitr should prevail between them. Those who planned the raid were regardless of the national honour, which was pledged to respect the independence of the Transvaal; and those who carrierl it out, by the utter feebleness of their performance, brought disgrace upon the British flag.
Our Circulating Library. During the past month there has been a great demand for boxes of books. The new series, comprising more contemporary fiction than the original boxes, has been very successful. Any society or institution which desires to provide its members with a continuously varied selection of books could not do better than subscribe to the series. At the present moment there are boxes scattered throughout the whole of the United Kingdom, We have now a considerable number of second-hani books to dispose of, and will be glad to supply particulars to any club which wishes to forin a permanent library of its own or to add to its present stock of books.
THE Dublin Revier for October is an especially gool number. Special notice is required for Mrs. Mulhall's statement of the Irish origin of Dante's poem, and the articles dealing with the Reformation and Revolution by Father Kent, Mr. Conder, and Miss Shield Mr. G. T. Mackenzie presses the Indian practice of making grants to denominational schools in behalf of their secular instruction, irrespective of religion taught or not taught, as an example for the Home Gover minent. Miss E. JI. Clerku contributes a cheering word on the crisis in Rhodesia, the opening up of which land she pronounces a great success.
MR. DILLON, MR. REDMOND, MR. PARNELL:
DISCLOSURES BY MR. W. O'BRIEN. " I'as Mr. Parnell ladly treated ? " is the title of the paper
which Mr. W. O'Brien contributes to the Contemporary, and which sheds a strange light upon the present quarrel between Redmondite and Dillonite. The writer begins by declaring that "Mr. Healy's poisoned words” in Committee Room 15, and his subsequent writings, are almost the only grounds for Parnellite resentment and estrangement, and now that Mr. Healy's domination is at an end, one would suppose there might be an end to the schism among the Nationalists. The purpose of the article is first to make clear, from letters and telegrams in the Boulogne negotiations, that Mr. Parnell was not badly treated, but was treated, and confessed that he was treated, with friendly and respectful consideration. But in doing this, the much more remarkable and practically important fact is thatMr. John Redmond, who is now the only considerable enemy of reunion, was, while Mr. Parnell was still alive, one of our most earliest auxiliaries in bringing about Mr. Parnell's retirement, and substituting for him the very man who is at this moment chairman of the Irish party, Mr. John Dillon.
As Mr. O'Brien says, " The fact will astonish many people.” But he goes on to prove it; and calmly predicts that "the moment earnest Parnellites master the facts, Mr. Redmond's power as a mischief-maker will not be worth much further notice.”
MR. REDMOND AS DILLONITE. In the course of the negotiations following on the Kilkenny election, Mr. Redmoud himself being witness, Mr. Parnell proposed to retire if Mr. O'Brien would accept the chairmanship of the united party. Mr. O'Brien urged that Mr. John Dillon should be the leader; and now, in answer to the charge of " murdering Parnell,” Mr. O'Brien offers “ proofs of the active exertions of Mr. Redmond and his friends in inducing Mr. Parnell to retire in Mr. Dillon's favour." The documents he cites are apparently conclusive enough. The “most fatal " difficulty was the personal bitterness against Mr. Parnell in“a section of our own camp” a small but active and violent minority of our colleagues ”-which paralysed the peace negotiations.
“CECIL RHODES HAS STIFFENED" PARNELL, But there were other difficnlties. In a letter of date, Dublin, February 10th, 1891, Jr. Tim Harrington wrote to Mr. O'Brien warmly wishing his efforts success as the only means of saving Mr. Parnell and Ireland. Here is à curious glimpse the letter gives us :
However, we had no difficulty in inducing Parnell to put he thing before you directly. His confidence in you is us trong as ever, but I think John said something to him about he funds in Paris which has aroused in bis inind the susicion that, if he retires now, the difficulties to confront him, if er he attempts to return, will be rendered all the more "midable only by his retirement. It is very probable his erview with Cecil Rhodes has stiffened him, and no doubt • pressure from some troublesome lads here in Ireland ling upon him on no account to give way has had some
dispute is as to the Land question, I do hope that you will use all your influence to have this difficulty removed, and I say this as one who is quite as anxious for the settlement as you are yourself. ... Of course I can quite understand a feeling of impatience on the part of G. and his friends, and God knows you have special reason for impatience, but so much is at stake, and we have approached so near an agreement that it would be horrible if a break came now. All the influence that Harrington, Clancy, and I possess is being used in season and out of it in the right direction, and we are all quite impressed with the belief in P.'s bona fides, and that the demand he is making come from his natural desire to use the opportunity to get as good a bargain as possible--but there are other influences amongst his friends besides ours, as you must know, and I most earnestly beg of you to leave no stoneunturned to bring about the small further concession which is alono needful now to put us all in accord. ... Before the final word is said P. will have a meeting of his supporters. I need, I think, scarcely tell you that you may count on my continued assistance--whatever it is worth.
On February 9, when the negotiations were practically over, Mr. Redmond wrote to Mr. O'Brien :
“I am afraid Jolin's intervicw with P. at Calais had a verybud effect and accounts for much of recent events. Ever since P. has been saying if you were to be the leader, as he originally strongly urged, the difficulties would be very small. I wish to God this could be so. I well know John (Dillon) would not be the one to object.”
MR. PARNELL'S LAST LETTER TO MR. O'BRIEN. Mr. O'Brien publishes with a certain elation, quite explicable under the circumstances, Mr. Parnell's last and confidential note to himn :
“ House of Commons, London, February 11, 1891. “ MY DEAR O'BRIEN, --In addition to the longer letter which I send you for publication I desire to write you a few words expressing how deeply I feel the kindness and gentleness of spirit which you have shown me throughout these negotiations. I have felt all along that I had no right to expect from anybody the constant anxiety to meet my views, the intense desire that all proposals claiming your sanction should be as palatable as possible to me, which have so distinguished your conduct of the communications between us. I know you lave forgiven much roughness and asperity upon my part and have made allowances for some unreasonable conduct from me, which, to anybody gifted with less patience and conciliation than yourself, would have been most difficult. I appreciate intensely the difficulties which have surrounded you in these negotiations, the constant and daily anxiety of which would have been overwhelming to anybody of less courage and devotion than yourself, and I fervently hope and believe that the prospects for Ireland are not so dark as you fear, and that after a little time, having pass d through these clouds of darkness, we may once again stand upon our former footing when in happier days we were comrades in arms on behalf of 11 United Ireland.-My dear O'Brien, Always yours, CHARLES S. PARXI LL."
A STUDY IN CYNICAL INCONSISTENOY. Jir. O'Brien, in his closing words, presses his indictment against Mr. Redmond :
To read the declarations of friendiiness and confidence showered upon Mr. Dillon and myself in the letters above printed, side by side with the impudent misrepresentations and abuse he has poured upon our heads ever since the only obstacle to our complete working agreement disappeared, forms the most curious study in cypical inconsistency to be found in the history even of an era which is adorned by Mr. Chamberlain.
These disclosures may make it hard for the Redmondites to answer; they make it perhaps more hard for them to reunite with the party of Mr. Dillon and Mr. O'Brien.