IRELAND UNDER MR. FORSTER.
When Mr. Gladstone returned to power, Mr. Forster was appointed Chief
Secretary for Ireland, with Lord Cowper as Viceroy. There was great
distress--as there generally is in Ireland--and exceptional efforts had
been made, both by the Government and the people of this country, to meet
it. A benevolent fund had been raised, chiefly through the influence of
the Duchess of Marlborough, wife of the Lord-Lieutenant, and a Distress
Relief Act had been carried by Parliament to empower the application of
three-quarters of a million of the Irish Church Surplus Fund, and some
good had unquestionably been done by the public and private effort thus
made to relieve distress; but it was clear, from the results of the
elections, and from the speeches of the popular Irish leaders, that it
was not to measures of this kind that the people looked for permanent
relief. The unusual distress of 1879 had intensified and aggravated the
chronic disaffection, and sixty members had been returned to Parliament
who were pledged to do their utmost to put an end to English rule in
Ireland by securing Home Rule. Flushed with the brilliant success they
had achieved, the Liberal party entered upon office confident that a
career of prosperity lay before them. Lord Beaconsfield's defeat had
been brought about by the national repudiation of his foreign policy;
and, in the first instance, it was of foreign, rather than domestic,
affairs that the new House of Commons was thinking. But Ireland at once
came to the front. The existing Coercion Act would expire in a few
weeks, and it was necessary to secure its renewal before it lapsed; but
the Cabinet resolved to try the experiment of governing by means of the
ordinary law.
The Lords threw out Mr. Forster's measures intended to relieve Ireland.
He did not scruple to avow his vexation and resentment at their summary
rejection, and the dangerous effect it would have in the disturbed
districts during the coming winter, which might lead to the adoption of
much stronger measures, both of concession and coercion, than the
Government had hitherto attempted. In response, Mr. Parnell, in
addressing a great audience at Ennis, enunciated the plan already known
as boycotting, whereby every man who took an evicted farm, and everyone
who aided or abetted eviction, should be shunned as a leper in the fair,
refused custom in the market, and treated as an intruder at the altar.
Before the year was out the courts established by the Land League
publicly heard and determined the merits of each case as it arose. The
signal for acts of summary violence was set by the fate of Lord
Mountmorres, who had incurred popular dislike by his conduct as a
rigorous magistrate, and was put to death on the highway near his own
house in open daylight. Mr. Forster early proposed to suspend the Habeas
Corpus Act, and to prosecute the prominent movers of the agitation. Mr.
Gladstone clung to the hope that the friends of law and order would
combine to suppress the tendencies to outrage, and wished to defer as
long as possible the suspension of constitutional freedom; but ere
Parliament had reassembled in 1881, the progress of disorder and outrage
had increased, and the Cabinet reluctantly authorized the introduction of
a measure for the protection of life and property. Twenty-two nights
were spent in debating it; but it was passed by an overwhelming majority,
comprising Ministerialists, Radicals, and Conservatives. But the
obstruction systematically offered to repressive legislation at last
provoked Speaker Brand to assert a discretionary power of terminating
debate, which led to the introduction of a change of procedure, of which
the most prominent measure was the Cloture.
The Irish Land Bill was the chief work of the session of 1881. Mr.
Forster's work at this time was arduous and untiring to keep the Cabinet
up to duty. In October, 1881, Mr. Gladstone writes from Hawarden: 'Your
sad and saddening letter supplies much food for serious reflection; but I
need not reply at great length, mainly because I practically agree with
you. I almost take for granted, and I shall assume until you correct me,
that your meaning about ruin to property is as follows: You do not mean
the ruin to property which may directly result from exclusive dealing,
but you mean ruin to property by violence--_e.g._, burning of a man's
haystack because he had let his cars on hire to the constabulary. On
this assumption I feel politically quite prepared to concur with you in
acting upon legal advice to this effect; nor do I dissent, under the
circumstances, from the series of propositions by which you seek to
connect Parnell and Co. with the prevalent intimidation. But I hardly
think that so novel an application of the Protection Act should be
undertaken without the Cabinet.'
In the same month Mr. Gladstone went to Leeds, where he had a reception
which exceeded all expectations. In his speech he devoted himself to the
Irish Question. Amidst enthusiastic cheers from the vast audience, he
pointed to Mr. Forster's name, and spoke in generous terms of the arduous
and painful task in which he was then engaged; and then he went on in
clear and forcible language to denounce the conduct of Mr. Parnell and of
the other Land League leaders in striving to stand between the people of
Ireland and the Land Act, in order that the beneficial effects of that
measure might not be allowed to reach them. Such conduct, Mr. Gladstone
declared, would not be tolerated. 'The resources of civilization were,'
he observed, 'not exhausted.' Then followed the arrest of Mr. Parnell.
Within twelve hours the news was spread over the civilized world, and
everywhere it created a great sensation. Mr. Gladstone, speaking at a
meeting at the Guildhall on the same day, first announced the fact of Mr.
Parnell's arrest to the people of England, and the statement was received
with an enthusiastic outburst that startled even the speaker himself. It
was hailed as if it were the news of a signal victory. Throughout
England the belief--so soon to be dissipated--was held that the
imprisonment of Mr. Parnell at Kilmainham must mean the downfall of his
authority, and the extinction of the great organization of which he was
the head; in reality, the outrages and assassinations became greater.
One result was a change in the policy of the Government. The English
public was asked to believe that the Irish policy of the Government was
not the policy of Mr. Gladstone, but of Mr. Forster alone. On March 24,
1882, Mr. Gladstone wrote to Mr. Forster. who was then in Dublin,
pointing out to him the growing opposition to the Ministerial proposals
for instituting the Closure, and the prevalent belief among the Irish
members in the House that by stopping the Closure they might prevent the
renewal of the Protection Act. The Prime Minister added 'that, with the
Land Act working briskly, resistance to process disappearing, and rents
increasingly and even generally, though not uniformly, paid, a renewal of
so odious a power as that we now hold _is_ impossible, and that whatever
may be needed by way of supplement to the ordinary law must be found in
other forms.'
Mr. Parnell, speaking at Wexford on October 10, 1881, said: 'He (Mr.
Gladstone) would have you believe that he is not afraid of you, because
he has disarmed you, because he has attempted to disorganize you, because
he knows that the Irish nation is to-day disarmed as far as physical
weapons go, but he does not hold this kind of language with the Boers
(cheers for the Boers. A Voice: 'We will be Boers too!'). What did he
do at the commencement of the session? He said something of this kind
with regard to the Boers. He said that he was going to put them down,
and as soon as he discovered that they were able to shoot straighter than
his own soldiers, he allowed those few men to put him and his Government
down, and although he has attempted to regain some of his lost position
in the Transvaal by subsequent chicanery and diplomatic negotiations, yet
that sturdy and small people in the distant Transvaal have seen through
William Ewart Gladstone; and they have told him again, for the second
time, that they will not have their liberties filched from them; and I
believe that, as a result, we shall see that William Ewart Gladstone will
again yield to the people of the Transvaal (hear, hear). And I trust
that, as the result of this great movement, we shall see that, just as
Gladstone by the Act of 1881 has eaten all his old words, has departed
from all his formerly declared principles, now we shall see that these
brave words of this English Prime Minister will be scattered as chaff
before the united and advancing determination of the Irish people to
regain for themselves their lost land and their lost legislative
independence (loud and continued cheering).'
Miss Parnell termed him a hoary-headed old miscreant; Miss Helen Taylor,
of the London School Board, described him as a dastard and a recreant;
Mr. O'Donnell, M.P., said Gladstone was a Judas, who had betrayed Ireland
by the kiss of peace to the persecutor and tormentor. In Philadelphia,
the City of Brotherly Love, the effigy of Mr. Gladstone was burned by a
crowd of fifteen hundred Irish under the direction of the League leaders.
Even in Hawarden the magistrates had to place four additional constables
to protect Mr. Gladstone from the effects of Irish revenge. Mr.
Gladstone, said Mr. Parnell at Wexford just before he was arrested, was
the greatest coercionist, the greatest and most unrivalled slanderer of
the Irish nation, that ever lived.
The situation was gloomy. Naturally Mr. Gladstone made as light as
possible of the situation in the speech he delivered at the Lord Mayor's
banquet. The speech for the moment silenced the murmurs of dissension
inside the Cabinet. 'You said,' Mr. Gladstone wrote to Forster, 'that if
we are to ask for a suspension of Habeas Corpus, it must be on a case of
great strength and clearness. But do these figures, after all the
allowance to be made for protection, indicate such a case? As far as I
can judge, there is a tendency in Ireland upon a series of years to a
decline in the total number of homicides. The immense increase in
property offences, agrarian, for 1880 seems to me to mark the true
character of the crisis and the true source of the mischief of the Land
League. But I incline to assume that any suspension of Habeas Corpus
must be founded on danger to life.'
When Parliament met in 1881 began the long running fight between Mr.
Forster and Mr. Parnell. As the chief representative of the Land League,
Mr. Parnell had spoken defending the action of the League, and Mr.
Forster retorted that the meetings of that body had constantly been
followed by outrage, and that the object of the Land Leaguers was not to
bring about an alteration in the law of the land by constitutional means,
but to prevent any payment of rent save such as might be in accordance
with the unwritten law of Mr. Parnell. In Parliament Government carried
a Protection Act, an Arms Bill, and an Irish Land Bill. The Acts were of
no avail. Outrages increased after the passing of the Protection Act.
In May Mr. John Dillon was arrested and others of his party. In
September it was resolved to arrest Mr. Parnell, 'the uncrowned king,' as
his followers called him. Mr. Gladstone assented to the arrest if in the
opinion of the law officers of the Crown he had by his speeches been
guilty of treasonable practices.
On one occasion, when Mr. Forster had suggested that he had better
retire, Mr. Gladstone wrote by return of post to acknowledge 'the very
grave letter,' which he thought ought to be laid before the Cabinet.
'With regard to your leaving Ireland,' wrote the Prime Minister, 'there
is an analogy between your position and mine. Virtually abandoning the
hope of vital change for the better, I come on my own behalf to an
anticipation projected a little further into the future--that after the
winter things may mend, and that my own retirement may give facilities
for the fulfilment of your very natural desire.' It was in a day or two
after this Mr. Gladstone congratulated Forster upon the manner in which
he had accomplished a difficult and delicate task in connection with the
Irish Executive. 'It is not every man,' he writes, 'who in difficult
circumstances can keep a cool head with a warm heart--and that is what
you are doing.'
In 1882 the situation in Ireland became increasingly difficult and
dangerous. As the time drew near for the meeting of Parliament, it was
evident that the session would be a stormy one. In all quarters attacks
upon the Chief Secretary seemed to be in course of preparation. The
Protection Act had not put an end to the outrages, despite the fact that
hundreds of prisoners, including Mr. Parnell and other members of
Parliament, were under lock and key. Above all, the Protection Act would
expire during the year, and consequently Ministers must allow it to
expire, or must ask Parliament to spend weeks, or possibly months, in
renewing it. Yet in the Queen's Speech it was stated that the condition
of Ireland showed signs of improvement, and encouraged the hope that
perseverance in the course hitherto pursued would be rewarded with the
happy results which were so much to be desired. The Lords resolved to
find fault with the working of the Land Act. The challenge of the Lords
was taken up by the Government in the House of Commons, and a resolution
moved by Mr. Gladstone, that any inquiry at that time into the working of
the Land Act would defeat its operation, and must be injurious to the
interests of good government in Ireland, was carried by a majority of 303
to 235.
After the Easter recess the attacks on Forster were renewed. It was
demanded that he should be removed from office, and that the suspects
should be immediately released, on the plea that their imprisonment had
not prevented the continuance of the outrages. To make matters worse,
the American Government became urgent in their demands for the release of
those prisoners who could prove that they were citizens of the United
States, while, in addition to the political perplexities thus created,
the atrocious murder of Mrs. H. J. Smythe, as she was driving home from
church in West Meath, sent a thrill of horror through the country. At
this time Forster, in a letter to Mr. Gladstone, writes: 'That if now or
at any future time' (the _Pall Mall_ had been suggesting his resignation)
'you think that from _any cause_ it would be to the advantage of the
public service or for the good of Ireland that I should resign, I most
unreservedly place my resignation in your hands.'
In reply, Mr. Gladstone wrote from Hawarden, April 5, 1882: 'Yesterday
morning I was unwell, and did not see the papers, so that I have only
just become aware of the obliging suggestion that you should retire. I
suspect it is partly due to a few (not many) Tory eulogies. There is one
consideration which grievously tempts me towards the acceptance of the
offer conveyed in your most handsome letter. It is that if you go, and
go on Irish grounds, surely I must go too. . . . We must continue to
face our difficulties with an unbroken front and with a stout heart. I
do not admit your failure, and I think you have admitted it rather too
much--at any rate, by omission--by not putting forward the main fact that
in the deadly fight with the social revolution you have not failed, but
are succeeding. Your failure, were it true, is our failure; and outrage,
though a grave fact, is not the main one. Were there a change in the
features of the case, I would not hesitate to recognise it, with whatever
pain, as unreservedly as I now record their actual condition. I do not
suppose we ought to think of legislating on the Irish case until after
Whitsuntide.'
But, nevertheless, Mr. Forster did resign. In April Lord Spencer
succeeded Earl Cowper as Irish Viceroy, and negotiations were carried on
between Captain O'Shea and Mr. Parnell--known now as the Kilmainham
Treaty--of which Mr. Forster strongly complained. Mr. Gladstone took a
different view. Writing to Forster, he expressed the satisfaction with
which he had read Mr. Parnell's letter. With regard to the expression in
the letter of the writer's willingness to co-operate in future with the
Liberal party, Mr. Gladstone wrote: 'This is a _hors d'oeuvre_ which we
had no right to expect. I may be far wide of the mark, but I can
scarcely wonder at O'Shea saying, "The thing is done. . . ." On the
whole, Parnell's letter is the most extraordinary I ever read. I cannot
help feeling indebted to O'Shea.'
In May Mr. Forster resigned. Writing on the 2nd of that month, Mr.
Gladstone, in reply, says: 'I have received your letter with much grief,
but on this it would be selfish to expatiate. I have no choice--followed
or not followed, I must go on. . . . One thing, however, I wish to say.
You wish to minimize in any public statement the cause of your retreat.
In my opinion, _and I speak from experience_, viewing the nature of the
case, you will find this hardly possible. For a justification, I fear,
you will have to found upon the doctrine of a new departure, or must
protest against it and deny it with heart and soul.'
Speaking of the parting, Mr. Forster told his biographer that he had
learned not merely to esteem, but to love Mr. Gladstone during their
intercourse as colleagues, and he bore testimony to the fact that he had
never ceased to be supported by him until the moment came when the Prime
Minister found reason to change his policy. Then, however, the change of
policy was swiftly followed by a change of attitude, so far as politics
were concerned, deplored by both men, but, under the circumstances,
inevitable.
Lord Frederick Cavendish was gazetted as Mr. Forster's successor. He
arrived in Dublin on May 6. On that day he and Mr. Burke, the Irish
Under-Secretary, were foully murdered while crossing the Phoenix Park by
a band of assassins, whose plans, it was evident, had been laid long
beforehand with the utmost deliberation. Mr. Forster had escaped them on
his departure from Dublin by what almost seemed a miracle. In a few days
after, Sir William Harcourt introduced into the House of Commons a new
Coercion Bill, which, although it was laid upon the lines introduced by
Mr. Forster before he retired from office, was in many respects more
severe and stringent in its character than anything which he had
proposed.
Another difficulty which beset the Government was the occupation of Egypt
in 1882. The bombardment of Alexandria led to the retirement of Mr.
Bright from the Cabinet. Many Liberals were profoundly dissatisfied. In
the early part of the session of 1883, the question of our obligations in
South Africa, and our duties towards native chiefs who had trusted in our
promises, arose in connection with Bechuanaland. In domestic politics
the question was that of the Household Suffrage Bill, which, carried in
the Commons, was thrown out in the House of Lords.
But a greater question was that of the abandonment of the Soudan and the
failure to relieve Gordon at Khartoum. It was in the course of one of
his most urgent appeals to Government not to delay the sending out of an
expedition that Forster used words respecting Mr. Gladstone which were
strangely misinterpreted at the time. Speaking of the dangers of
Gordon's position, he said: 'I believe everyone but the Prime Minister is
already convinced of that danger . . . and I attribute his not being
convinced to his wonderful power of persuasion. He can persuade most
people of most things, and above all, he can persuade himself of almost
anything.' It is difficult now to realize that these words were resented
by Lord Hartington as 'a bitter and personal, and evidently
highly-prepared and long-reflected-over, attack upon the sincerity of Mr.
Gladstone.' It is to be remembered that at this time Mr. Bright had
resigned office, and the Government was daily growing weaker. The attack
of the Tories was incessant, and the supporters of the Government became
daily more faint-hearted. It is said of one of our months that it comes
in like a lion and goes out like a lamb. In the present instance this
was specially true of the Gladstone Government. In June, 1883, the
Government were beaten on the Budget. In reference to this event Lord
Shaftesbury writes: 'I have just seen the defeat of Government on the
Budget by Conservatives and Parnellites combined; an act of folly
amounting to wickedness. God is not in all their thoughts, nor their
country either. All seek their own, and their own is party spirit,
momentary triumph, political hatred, and the indulgence of low political
and unpatriotic passions.'
A more accurate observer, 'I rather fancy,' wrote Mr. W. H. Smith, M.P.,
'the Government look for it as a relief from their troubles.' The last,
and perhaps the most serious of all, was the manner in which they had
allowed themselves to be outwitted by Russia in Afghanistan. This belief
was generally entertained all over the land. Mr. Gladstone was glad to
put an end to his perplexities by resigning office. The Queen offered to
make him an Earl, which he had too much sense to accept--though in office
no one was more ready to make peers of his friends. In his later years
his trump card was an attack on the House of Lords. Lord Salisbury
became Premier, all necessary business was quickly disposed of, and in
the autumn a General Election took place. In the boroughs the Liberal
losses were heavy; in the counties they increased their strength. One of
Mr. Gladstone's appeals to the country was sounded in his speech at
Edinburgh to the electors of Midlothian. He passionately implored his
party to hold together, in order, above all things, that they should
return a Liberal majority so considerable as to make it independent of
the Irish party. He expressed the hope that from one end of the country
to the other there would not be a single representative returned to
Parliament who would listen to any proposition tending to impair the
visible empire. Whatever demands might be made on the part of Ireland,
if they were to be entertained they must be subject to the condition that
the union of the empire should be preserved. Mr. Parnell's answer was to
return eighty-six Home-Rulers for Ireland; Lord Salisbury remained
Premier. Lord Shaftesbury wrote: 'In a year or so we shall have Home
Rule disposed of at all hazards to save us from hourly and daily bores.'
In the meanwhile the Conservatives held feebly to office till 1886, when
in January Mr. Gladstone resumed office as Premier.