CHAPTER II_My diaries, being a personal narrative of events 1888-1914, Part 2 (1900-1914)

GEORGE WYNDHAM’S IRISH LAND BILL, 1902

King Edward VII’s reign began with a fair promise for the world, or at

least for the British Empire, of peace; and there was good reason to

hope that a more reasonable foreign policy would be pursued than that

which had so violently disturbed the last years of Queen Victoria’s

reign. King Edward was by nature and habit a peacemaker, and one of his

chief occupations as Prince of Wales had been to use his social

influence in composing his friends’ quarrels. It was disagreeable to him

that persons of his Court with whom he came in contact, and in whom he

felt an interest, should be on ill terms with each other, and he had

long felt a pride in bringing them together. His own life had not been

altogether free from domestic storms, but these had not been due to

faults of temper on his part, rather of conduct, for he was a lover of

pleasure and allowed himself wide latitude in its indulgence. This had

involved him in more than one scandal out of which he had always managed

to emerge without serious injury to his reputation. These irregularities

had indeed rather added to his popularity for they showed him to have a

kindly heart and he had always proved faithful to his friends. His

experience, too, had made him a good judge of character both with men

and women, and gave him a certain facility in his intercourse with both

which was not without its diplomatic uses. Thus when for the first time

he found himself in a position to influence the conduct of foreign

affairs (for Queen Victoria had been always jealous of his being

entrusted with state secrets) his natural instinct was to use it in the

interests of peace, especially with France, where the chief friction was

found, and from the first days of his accession he busied himself in

bringing about a settlement of their international differences.

As Prince of Wales he had been in the habit of spending a certain number

of weeks every year on the continent, and especially in Paris, where he

had become personally popular, through his somewhat Bohemian tastes and

love of the French stage. In Germany he was almost equally at home,

though not on the best of terms with his nephew the Emperor William, and

he was on pleasant terms, too, with the Russian Court, and indeed all

the Courts, having a family connection with most of them. I knew much of

his private life, more than I can relate here, through certain common

friends entirely in his confidence, and my feeling towards him has

always been for this reason, that of a well-wisher as well as a loyal

subject.

The very first object which he set himself to bring about as King was to

put an end to the Boer War, not so much perhaps on any humane principle

as ending what he was well aware had become the cause of vast discredit

to England throughout Europe, and in this he succeeded notwithstanding

the Tory obstinacy of those in power. A second scandal which he would

have willingly seen ended was that of Ireland. He was aware, as very few

Englishmen had discovered, how grave a scandal the long disloyalty of

the Irish race was in the eyes of the outside world, and how seriously

it affected the dignity of the British Empire and of himself personally

as Ireland’s king. Thus the title bestowed on him, not quite seriously

at first, of “Edward the Peacemaker” was in my opinion well deserved,

though, through the diplomatic blunders of our Foreign Office and the

incurable cupidities of our advanced imperialists, the seeds of peace

sown during his reign were so perversely misapplied as to bring about

the cataclysm of the general European War which ten years later

overwhelmed his successor. Lord Salisbury’s retirement from office

immediately after King Edward’s coronation and Mr. Balfour’s succession

as Prime Minister marks the true end of the Victorian era, and the

beginning of another, better let us admit in its intentions, but

disastrous beyond all possible foresight on King Edward’s part, in its

results of ruin for the European world.

I spent the first winter of the new reign, 1902-1903, once more in

Egypt. On leaving London, I wrote “_28th Nov._, I had met Frank

Lascelles at my Club and had had a long talk with him about old times

and new. He had been staying at Sandringham with the King and the

Emperor William and told me much about them both. It is pleasant to find

him still affectionate as in old days and unspoilt by the dignities of

his position. The truth is these diplomatic dignities seen close are

small things and do not turn their possessors’ heads unless they come

very suddenly and unexpectedly. An ambassador in the regular service

blossoms gradually and has plenty of time to remember that he was once

an attaché and is still a mortal. On my way through France I had

travelled with Sir John Gorst (the elder) on his way to attend the

opening of the great Assouan dam and to visit his son Eldon at Cairo.

Talking about past events in Egypt he told me that in 1886 it had been

intended by Lord Salisbury to supersede Cromer and appoint Drummond

Wolff in his place and as he, Gorst, was in Cairo at the time, Stafford

Northcote had commissioned him to find out how the change would be

regarded in native quarters, and he had gone to Nubar, then in office,

and consulted him. Nubar had told him that if Cromer went he and his

colleagues in office would go too, and it was in consequence of Gorst’s

report in this sense that Cromer was allowed to stay on. It is curious

that it should have been Gorst, Wolff’s intimate friend, who did him

this ill turn, though doubtless Gorst was only fulfilling the commission

given him by his superiors. It was a decision of critical importance,

for on it really rested the question of the alternative policies in

Egypt, Cromer’s which was a policy of remaining and anglicizing the Nile

Valley, Wolff’s of restoring National self government.”

On our voyage from Marseilles to Alexandria “I have been reading the

Documents connected with the trial of Joan of Arc which have just been

published. Her death is perhaps the most stupendous political crime ever

perpetrated in Western Europe, certainly the blackest in English

history, and this, remembering Cromwell in Ireland, the suppression of

the Indian Mutiny and the desecration of the Mahdi’s tomb, is saying

much. At the same time there was undeniably a certain legal case against

Jeanne in the Ecclesiastical Court which condemned her. The position she

took up and persisted in with regard to her visions and her mission from

God, made it impossible for the Inquisition to hold a middle course

concerning her. Either she had been inspired by God or she had been

inspired by the devil, for in those days the idea of mental

hallucination was unknown, and if not by God she was necessarily a

sorceress worthy of death. In reality Jeanne was a pious, good girl,

persuaded of the truth of her ‘visions’ and acting single-mindedly in

obedience to them. A claim is made for her by the editor of the book

that her answers to her judges have a character of supernatural wisdom.

This seems to me to be exaggerated; she was often at fault, and to some

very simple questions gave answers by no means wise, as when she refused

to repeat the Pater Noster or to say who counselled her to put on male

attire. So much for the ecclesiastics. The conduct of the English

commanders Bedford, Warwick, and the rest, was infamous to the last

degree and without a shadow of excuse. They burned her and scattered her

ashes in the Seine for precisely the same reason that Kitchener and his

scoundrel officers blew up the Mahdi’s tomb and threw his body into the

Nile. It was the dastard spirit of revenge against one who had beaten

English armies in the field, and of whom they had all been afraid.

“_4th Dec._—We arrived off Alexandria at daybreak, the city looming out

of a bank of smoke and black cloud for all the world like Liverpool. It

was only a local effect, however, and we were soon in the sunshine and

on our way across the Delta, and are now at Sheykh Obeyd. Between

Damanhur and Cairo I counted seven pied kingfishers, three hoopoes, two

spur-winged plovers, one snipe, one false snipe, and fifty-two little

white herons, a thing to note in view of the rapid extermination of

birds in Egypt. We arrived at home a full hour before sunset, having

found Hamouda Abdu, now made a Bey, expecting us at the Cairo station.

His brother the Mufti had just left for Assouan for the opening of the

great Nile dam.

“The building scheme at Kafr el Jamus has been going on apace, the whole

area north of the village has been laid out in streets and squares,

though these have not yet been built over, indicating the rise of the

tide which will one day join us in continuous houses with Cairo. Our

neighbour Selim Bey Faraj, the Christian judge of Benha, is dead, a poor

unmanly creature who had managed to get on bad terms with all the

Moslems round. He had got possession of forty acres of land to which he

clung pertinaciously in spite of some persecution by the Arabs provoked

by his own covetousness. He had a passion for litigation and was

memorable for a record series of actions at law brought against his wife

which he carried before every tribunal in Egypt, native and foreign, and

then on appeal before the Sultan at Constantinople, and as a last resort

before the Pope at Rome, and lost them all.

“_19th Dec._—The Grand Mufti (Sheykh Mohammed Abdu) came and sat with me

this morning for a couple of hours talking. He had sent me Butler’s

‘Conquest of Egypt by the Arabs’ of which he had received a presentation

copy and I explained its contents to him, for he does not read English.

He treats Butler’s theory of the Makawkas being identical with Cyrus the

Melchite Patriarch of Alexandria as rubbish. He says that it is certain

the Makawkas was a Copt, the Governor of Memphis, and that he and the

mass of the Copts favoured the Arab invasion which relieved them of the

Roman tyranny. If it had not been so, how could the Copts have obtained

such very favourable terms from Amru and enjoyed the liberty and self

government they did for so many centuries after? It was only the

crusades and especially the attack made on Egypt by St. Louis that

caused the Copts to begin to be persecuted, they having declared for the

invaders. We talked also about contemporary affairs at Constantinople.

The Khedive is now on bad terms with the Sultan, having been ill-

received by him this summer. Abdul Hamid refused to receive him at all

until he had promised not to mention the affair of Thasos. The affair of

Thasos is this: the Khedive, who is owner of the island though it forms

no part of Egypt, has managed matters there so badly, raising the taxes

and imposing import duties that the people of the island complained of

it to the Sultan who made it a pretext for sending his own troops there

as garrison. The Khedive wanted these removed, but could not get a

hearing at the Palace.

“Abbas is now much under the influence of a Hungarian lady who has

become his mistress. She was with him at the time of his motor car

mishap, some weeks ago, when he missed his way coming back at night from

Dar el Beyda and stuck fast in the sand. The _ghaffirs_ who refused to

help him he put to forced labour for a week, a thing reported to the

British agency and made a cause of quarrel there against him. We talked

also of Midhat Pasha and the death of the Sultan Abdul Aziz. Abdu

confirms the account of this given me by Dr. Dickson in 1884 as one

certainly of suicide.[1] He tells me also how Midhat was starved to

death at Taif. They gave him bread so hard that the old man broke his

teeth over it and they allowed him no convenience of any kind in his

cell for his natural wants till he died of ill treatment, and his head

was then cut off and sent to Constantinople. Of Abdul Hamid, Abdu spoke

as the greatest scoundrel living, a strong word for a Grand Mufti to use

of his Caliph.

“_22nd Dec._—An Arabic newspaper has published a fantastic account of my

life and doings. I am by birth, it says, an Irishman, born with an

hereditary hatred of England, originally without fortune of my own, I

espoused the daughter of a great English lord under the following

condition. The lord, many years before, while travelling in the Ottoman

dominions, had been assassinated, and died leaving £4,000,000 sterling

to his daughter, with an injunction that she should avenge him. She

consequently imposed upon her suitors that they should take oath of

vengeance, and as I was the only one with sufficient courage, I had been

accepted, and had since devoted my life to an attempt to ruin the

Ottoman Empire. This I had sought to accomplish by stirring up the Arabs

to proclaim an Arabian Caliphate. It attributes the present coolness

between the Khedive and the Sultan to my machinations, as also the war

now going on in Arabia between Ibn Rashid and Mubarrak of Koweit, whom I

had supplied with arms, and a great deal more nonsense of the same kind.

I talked the thing over with Mohammed Abdu, who suggested that I might

make use of this as an opportunity for publishing in Arabic a full

account of my connection with the affairs in Egypt of 1881-82.” [Out of

this grew the work which occupied me all that winter in conjunction with

the Mufti, and which was published five years afterwards as my “Secret

History of the English Occupation of Egypt.”]

“_1st Jan._ 1903.—We celebrated the New Year (the second day of Shaban),

by dining with the Mufti, and talked over the old political days of

1882.”

5th January to 14th January were occupied in a desert journey by Tel el

Kebir, Salahieh, Ismaïlia and back by Kassassin and Om Kamr home. Our

party consisted of Anne and me and Miss Lawrence, with eleven camels,

four mares, and a donkey, Suliman Howeyti, Mutlak, and servants. I give

a few extracts:

“_6th Jan._—A short day, but an amusing one. Soon after starting we

crossed the track in the sand of two wolves, and followed them to a high

tell. There we sat looking out over the desert, and I presently caught

sight of the wolves cantering across a piece of open sand about a mile

away. Then I sent Mutlak back for Suliman, and we went down with him to

the place and after some search hit off the tracks, and he followed them

with us for an hour back to the Kittaban, where we had camped last

night. As we were going up wind, we got close to them before they saw

us. Then they were away both together over the high sand ridge, and we

after them full gallop. They were immense big wolves, one darker than

the other—it looked quite black against the sand. When we reached the

top of the ridge they were already a quarter of a mile away, with Mutlak

close behind them, for he was riding Manokta, who has great speed. Anne

and I did not follow beyond the ridge, but watched them going as

straight as a line for Kafr Abusir, till they disappeared in the great

distance. Mutlak, after following a couple of miles, had to give it up.

It was a fine sight, and the gentlemen of the 11th Hussars would have

had their work cut out for them if they had got upon the line. The track

of the larger of the two wolves in the damp sand was as big as the palm

of my hand, with immense sharp claws. After this we had a long canter to

catch up our camels. We have camped about five miles from Belbeys.

“_7th Jan._—We are camped on the field of battle of Tel el Kebir, inside

Arabi’s line of earthworks. These are of immense extent, though for the

most part a mere ditch and bank, which any cavalry regiment would cross

almost without checking speed. As we arrived we sighted a jackal running

along the embankment, and in another direction half-a-dozen British

soldiers in their red coats out for a day’s holiday to look at the scene

of their country’s glory.

“_8th Jan._—We rode all along the front line of entrenchments, in the

ditch of which are still numerous human bones and a few skulls of the

‘poor patriots, partly purchased, partly pressed,’ who died there twenty

years ago. The embrasures of the half dozen forts, where the artillery

was posted, are built in part of the rushes of the Wady put in to

strengthen the gravel. The lines, though broken through in places by the

passage of camels, are still mostly intact, and in this dry climate will

last for several thousand years, and I fear outlast the fame of the

peasants that built them, in their one assertion of manhood, to defend

their country. The outlying fort in front of the lines was visible

eastwards. It was there that Ali Rouby was stationed in command of the

cavalry, Ali Rouby who betrayed his trust and allowed the English to

march past him without giving warning.

“_9th Jan._—To-night we are encamped near a high sand dune, from the top

of which there is a fine view of the line of the Suez Canal with the low

sandhills beyond it, and far away southwards Jebel Attaka and the line

of hills to Hamum; close at hand Abu Tufaïleh, where there are some

palms, not far from Ismaïlia, which is also distinctly in sight. There

are shepherds and camelherds of the Maaze near, some in tents, some

squatted under bushes, all very happy. We saw a fox, a hare, an eagle

owl and the track of two wolves. An immense spider of a light sand

colour, with brown bars, was found in my tent in the morning about three

inches across. I never saw the like in any of my journeys.

“_13th Jan._—Travelling all day across the great gravel plain south of

the Wady in a straight line to Om Kamr. On the way we met Abdallah Ibn

Majelli, of the Hannadi Arabs, out on a hawking expedition, with four

dependents, two hawks, and five greyhounds. These last, as it turned

out, were all descendants of our old English greyhound bitch Fly, a

daughter of whose, Jerboa, we gave some fifteen years ago to Prince

Ahmed. In spite of many crosses with Arab greyhounds the English type is

well preserved, though the dogs are smaller and lighter. Their master

told us they were quite acclimatised, and stood the heat and the hard

ground as well as their own greyhounds, retaining something of their

English speed. We saw them kill a hare after a rather long course among

the small bushes with which the plain was sprinkled. The hare must have

doubled forty times before the greyhounds got her. One of the hawks

waited overhead, but did not pursue the hare after the first minute. The

party had got a hubhara also in the morning. They were suspicious of us

when we first rode up to them. I fancy that, being away from their own

_dira_, they were afraid.

“_14th Jan._—Rode in to Sheykh Obeyd.

“_22nd Jan._—Professor Browne from Cambridge came to luncheon, bringing

a letter to me from Alfred Lyall. He is most intelligent about Eastern

things, not merely as an Orientalist, but also politically. He has lived

some time in Persia, and has written a couple of books about it, and

knows Persian and Turkish and Arabic, but having little colloquial

knowledge of the last, has come here to practise it. With this view he

has been attending Mohammed Abdu’s lectures on the Koran at the Azhar,

and already understands them fairly well, but his accent in talking is

peculiar. We took him to see Mutlak and Suliman in their tents, the

first ‘houses of hair’ he has ever sat under. He has been seeing

something of our English officials here, and tells amusing stories about

them, especially about Dunlop, the Adviser of the Ministry of

Instruction, who told him roundly that he would not have any Englishman

under him who came to Egypt knowing a word of Arabic. It only gave them

romantic ideas about the natives, and they would waste their time

explaining what they taught to the natives in Arabic instead of making

these learn English. For this reason he would not hear of accepting

young men from Cambridge who had passed an examination in Arabic. He

prefers to go to England, and pick up young men himself for the places

vacant in his department.

“_28th Jan._—An interesting man has been here, one of Ibn Rashid’s

slaves from Haïl, a half-bred Arab negro born in Nejd, by name Eïd. He

is here on a political mission of some kind to find out what is going on

in the world, and possibly to seek alliances for the new Emir Abd el

Aziz Ibn Rashid. His master is just now in rather bad luck, having lost

a considerable battle to Ibn Saoud, and been driven out of Aáred. He

gave us a graphic account of the battle, and how Ibn Rashid’s standard

had been passed on from hand to hand by his _khayal_ (horsemen) as one

after the other was slain, he himself taking it at last, though Mutlak

declares it fell into the hands of Ibn Saoud. According to Eïd, Ibn

Saoud has now gained possession of Aáred, and is living at Derayyeh, but

Kassim is still under Ibn Rashid, who has his Wakil at Bereydah. I asked

him what part the Dowlah (the Ottoman Government) had played in the

matter, and he protested that it had played none, except that the Sultan

had sent a present of Martini rifles and cannons to Abdul Aziz on his

accession. Of the English he said that Koweit was full of them. Mohammed

Abdu, who came in while we were talking, helped to cross-question him,

and there is no doubt the man is what he states he is, for he knows all

the politics of Nejd past and present; he is quite new to the outside

world, having travelled by way of Jof to Damascus, where he left his

_delûl_ and came on by steamer from Beyrout, a strange experience for

him. He has stopped the night with us, and this morning he is to go back

straight to Haïl. I gave him a piece of parting advice, and a message to

his master and to Hamoud and Majid, and the rest of them there.

‘Listen,’ I said, ‘to my word, and let these listen. There is danger to

the Arabs from the Dowlah, and there is danger also from the English;

have nothing to do with either of them. Make peace at once with Ibn

Saoud and remain quietly in your own country; leave Mubarrak alone at

Koweit and leave Ibn Saoud alone in Aáred, otherwise the Government of

the Ibn Rashids at Haïl will perish. You have seen here what comes of

English intervention, how the Khedive’s Government has been undermined

and destroyed, and so it will be with you in Arabia if you do not mind

your own affairs. Have nothing to do with either our Government or the

Sultan’s, your own is better than either. You have liberty at Haïl and

you are happy under it, and may it last a hundred years.’ I enforced

this advice with a present of five pounds as a proof of my sincerity,

and he seemed much impressed. I feel sure that he will deliver my

message to Abdul Aziz, whether his master follows my advice or not.”

[This incident is of interest as fixing the date of the beginning of the

rival intrigues on the one hand of the Ottoman Government, and on the

other of the Government of India in Peninsula Arabia with large

distributions of firearms to the rival tribes, and the stirring up of

strife, leading to the larger results we have seen within the last years

in the Hedjaz.]

“_30th Jan._—To-day Mahmud Pasha Sami came to see me with the Mufti. I

had not seen him since we were in Ceylon nineteen years ago, a very

distinguished gentleman now in his old age, a poet and a man of letters,

nearly blind, who has to be led by the hand.

“Also later one Abdul Kerim Murad of Medina, whose brother had given

Anne her first Arabic lessons in 1880. He has since been travelling

round a large part of the Mohammedan world during the last few years,

including Nigeria and Senegal, of which he gave a most interesting

account. [Especially of Sokoto in Nigeria, describing the great wealth

and industry of that city and its honourable government since overthrown

by the English.]

“_8th Feb._—Hamouda Bey, the Mufti’s brother, was here to-day. He has

been seriously ill of late through overwork at his legal business. He

has been recently given the rank of Bey, and in virtue of his new title

was invited the other night to the Khedive’s ball, as to which he gave

us a naïve and amusing account. ‘I went,’ he said, ‘with two friends,

men like myself in the legal profession, and we arrived among the first,

none of us having ever been at such an entertainment before. As we were

depositing our coats and umbrellas, for it had rained, at the vestiary,

suddenly I saw in a mirror a sight reflected such as I had never in my

life beheld, two women who were standing behind me, naked nearly to the

waist. I thought it must have been some illusion connected with my

illness and I was very much frightened. Their faces and arms and

everything were displayed without any covering, and I thought I should

have fallen to the ground. I asked what it meant and whether perhaps we

had not come to the right house, but my friends took me on into the

ball-room, where they showed me a number more women in the like

condition. “Who are they?” I inquired, and they told me, “These are the

wives of some of our English officials.” “And their husbands,” I asked,

“do they permit them to go out at night like this?” “Their husbands,”

they answered, “are here,” and they pointed out to me Mr. Royle, the

Judge of Appeal, before whom I had often pleaded, a serious man and very

stern, as the husband of one of them. This judge I saw dancing with one

of these naked ladies, gay and smiling and shameless, like a young man.

“And he is here,” I said, “to see his wife thus unclothed? and he dances

with her publicly.” “That,” they answered, “is not his wife, it is the

wife of another.” I was dumbfounded with shame for our profession. Just

then I saw Lord Cromer pass by. His coat was unbuttoned and showed his

shirt down to here (pointing to his stomach). I did not see Lord Cromer

dance, because as I was looking the Khedive entered the room leading

another of these ladies, and there was a crush of those near me to look

at him. I found myself jammed close to two of the naked ones, their

shoulders and bosoms pressed against me. I was terribly ashamed. As soon

as I could free myself, I called to my companions, “Come away, my dear

friends, this is no proper place for us,” and I took them with me home.

We would not stop for the refreshments which were being served and where

wine was being poured. The Khedive calls himself a good Moslem. He says

he never drinks wine and leads a respectable life, but this

entertainment of his was not respectable, and he himself was there, and

they tell me that the ladies of his household are allowed by him to look

from behind a screen at all these abominations.’ Such was Hamouda’s

naïve account of his adventure. ‘My dear fellow,’ I said, ‘you do not

understand that this is our work of civilizing the East, wait another

twenty years and you will see all the Cadi’s of Egypt with your brother

the Mufti among them, dancing with ladies even more naked than these,

and who knows, going with their own heads bare.’ ‘I can understand

everything,’ he said, ‘except this, that the husbands of these ladies

were there, actually there, in the dancing room, and did not send them

home.’

“_19th Feb._—Mr. Bourke Cockran called, having been introduced to me by

John Redmond as the most prominent Irishman in America. I found him an

intelligent, old-fashioned Irishman, and altogether worthy. He told me

he had been one of the strongest opponents of the Philippine policy of

the American Government, and that he hoped yet the Philippines would get

their Home Rule. He had seen George Wyndham in Ireland, and had talked

to him, and was confident he meant well with his Irish Land Bill.

“_25th Feb._—To Cairo for the first time this winter to see the Khedive.

I found him grown older and less fat and gay, with a rather harassed

look, like a man who had been worried and bullied, but whether by Cromer

or by his new Hungarian mistress I do not know, but a new lady he

certainly has, for we met him out camel riding last week with her,

attended by an eunuch and with a soldier riding behind them. The lady

was in European dress, with a gay hat, as if for a garden party, and

they were all mounted on handsome white camels. It was in the desert

near Kafr el Jamus.

“To-day he began at once to me about the different troubles he had had

in the Waïli and other affairs, and he went on to complain of Mohammed

Abdu’s ingratitude, in having continued to be friends with a certain

Reshid who had sinned against him. I defended the Mufti on this point

and exhorted the Khedive to make up the quarrel. I cannot help liking

Abbas in spite of his many vacillations and inconstancies. He has this

merit, that he always speaks out his mind, and is never offended at

one’s speaking one’s own. I fancy Cromer must hold some secret rod over

him and make him feel it from time to time.

“There is a scandal at Cairo which is grieving English society, Lady R.

having gone to a ball with her legs bare and dressed as a _saïs_. This

is considered a terrible impropriety, not so much for the thing itself

as because ‘she had just been dining with Lady Cromer,’ and ‘natives

were present.’ There has been a case of assault by two Bedouins on

Englishmen at Mariut about which the Khedive also told me, the matter

concerning him personally as he has property at Mariut.

“_26th Feb._—Lunched at the Mufti’s, Professor Browne being also there.

It is surprising with what fluency Browne now speaks Arabic, which he

only knew as a scholar without having ever spoken it when he came here

two months ago. He has been attending the Mufti’s lectures at the Azhar,

and tells me they are admirable and very fearless, and that he has a

ready facility in answering objections made to him by the old-fashioned

interpreters of the Koran. I talked to the Mufti about the Khedive’s

complaint against him and he will write to His Highness and explain the

mistake. A reconciliation between them is most necessary in public

interests. Acting together they are able to effect much, apart they

neutralize each other and are powerless.

“_6th March._—Mohammed Abdu brought Sheykh Reshid, the cause of the

Khedive’s wrath, to see me, who seems a worthy man, and with him Hafiz

Ibrahim, a Fellah poet, with whom we discussed the Moallakat. They all

three maintained that the best Arabic poetry was not that of the

Ignorance but of the second century of the Hejrah. This is quite

contrary to our English ideas, but for Eastern ears the standard of

merit is different from ours. What the learned here admire in poetry is

the prosody, not the meaning of the verse. They care very little for the

naïvetés of the pre-Islamic poets, regarding them only as blemishes, and

they cannot understand that there is any merit at all in the Abu Zeyd

cycle. I could see that these gentlemen despised me for admiring it.

“_14th March._—There has been a very large wolf in the garden for the

last week or ten days, which has been hanging about the tents at night,

where the sheep are folded just outside our wall. There are several

flocks here just now as there is no pasture in the hills, and the wolf

has come in with them probably. We have seen him more than once by

daylight, and at night he has howled near the house. Two nights ago,

however, a dozen new tents were pitched just outside with a quantity

more sheep belonging to the Howeytat on their way back from the Riff,

where they have been at bersim. The wolf came upon them about midnight.

There was a terrible noise of dogs barking and men shouting and shots

fired. In the morning I went out to see what had happened, and old Eid

came to me from the Assara and told me they had shot the wolf, and a

little further off I saw a group of Arabs digging a grave, as I thought

for the dead wolf. On coming close, however, I found it was no wolf but

a large dog, very old and very lean and covered with blood. They told me

that it was a mad dog which had rushed in among the sheep and which they

had killed. The singular part of the story, however, is that they have

not only buried the dog, but have made up a regular grave for it exactly

like a Moslem grave with tall bones set up at either end and neatly

trenched. It is a new thing for me that a dog should be thus honoured,

one I should have thought impossible in a Mohammedan country. Suliman,

whom I set to find out the truth about it, says they buried the dog for

fear that their own dogs should eat it and so go mad, but it does not

explain the grave.

“_15th March._—Our Mowled of Sheykh Obeyd. There were present the four

chief Sheykhs of the villages round as well as Yusuf Abu Shenab, Hassan

Musa el Akkad, and a number more important neighbours in addition to the

Arabs. Professor Browne, who had lunched with us, came on for the

festival. The feast was a general one, the poor of all our four parishes

being fed. One incident only marred it in the display of horsemanship.

Hamdan, an Agheyli from Bereyda, got his arm hurt with a _jerid_ to

which a point had been maliciously given with a nail, and he accused

Mutlak of the treachery, but though Mutlak had given the blow it had

been given with one of a number of _jerids_ got ready for the occasion,

and it was probable a trick was played on him through jealousy. The

wound, though only a scratch, has produced much ill-feeling.

“I have finished my Moallakat translation with Anne, and an introduction

to the volume. We hope to get it published during the summer.

“_16th March._—Arabi lunched with us and remained talking the whole

afternoon. He gave me a full account of the events of 1881-82, more

especially of his relations with Khedive Tewfik in 1881, the Circassian

conspiracy of the following year, the riot of Alexandria, and the battle

of Tel el Kebir, a very plain-spoken narrative as to which I cross-

questioned him closely. It impressed both Anne and me, and confirmed our

high opinion of him morally and intellectually. His present

circumstances, poor man, are to be pitied. He has returned to Egypt

after twenty years’ exile and finds a cold shoulder from every one in

authority, from the Khedive, who has not forgiven him his rebellion,

from Cromer, who considers him a nuisance, and from his fellow

countrymen at Cairo, who, misled by the fanciful tales invented by the

French Press of his having sold his country to the English, regard him

with unmerited suspicion. We are sorry for him, but I fear it is too

late to set things right.

“_23rd March._—On Saturday John Dillon and his wife, who are in Egypt,

came to spend the day. He gave us much Irish news and spoke of the

danger George’s land bill is running through the growing weakness of the

Government. He fears they will never get it through the House. He

expressed a high opinion of Winston Churchill’s ability, but says he is

even more unscrupulous than his father was. He thinks also that the

abstention of the Irish party this session from its long opposition will

have done harm by making people suspect a secret understanding between

Wyndham and Redmond. Nevertheless, he says, Irish prospects were never

higher than now, and Home Rule in some form must come soon. We talked,

too, about Egyptian affairs, which he knows pretty well, having always

taken an interest in them, and I have given him letters to Hafiz Effendi

Awwad and Carton de Wiart to help him in my absence to a right

understanding of the situation, for we leave for England to-day.”

We left Egypt for England on 24th March and arrived there on the 28th.

The next two months, which I spent principally in London, were mainly

occupied by me in using what influence I possessed with the Irish Party

to carry through George Wyndham’s Land Bill, as to which he had appealed

to me for help. The negotiations, of which I have a complete record in

my diary, are extremely interesting, and though they have no direct

concern with the main subject of this volume, namely, Egypt and our

foreign policy, I give them in their entirety here.

“_28th March._—Arrived in London and glad to be back. On issuing from

the Mont Cenis tunnel yesterday I found an English newspaper with a

report of the introduction of George’s Land Bill in Parliament. I had

hoped to be in time for it, for it is the biggest piece of legislation

that has been attempted for Ireland since Catholic Emancipation. George

seems to have presented his case splendidly, and so far has met with no

opposition. It is a very daring scheme, and follows closely all he told

me about it last autumn. I never thought he would be allowed to have it

so much his own way—for it involved a hundred millions

sterling—especially after Brodrick’s antics at the War Office and the

reaction for economy.

“_29th March (Sunday.)_—Lunched in Mount Street. Windsor and Lady

Windsor—nobody else—our talk mostly about George and the Irish Land

Bill, all in high praise. Then to Wentworth House, where Judith is

staying, and all there too in high good humour about Ireland. Lastly to

Belgrave Square where new raptures about George and his bill—how could

it be otherwise? George wants to see me.

“_30th March._—Lady Windsor came this morning. She has seen George since

yesterday, and brings me a message from him to the effect that I could

help him with the Irish members about the bill. Of course I shall be

delighted to do this, and it is all the easier because Redmond wrote

some weeks ago asking me to let him know as soon as I returned to

England. I must see George however first.

“_31st March._—Found George at his breakfast in Park Lane at the hour

appointed yesterday and he began at once about his Irish Land Bill. He

told me what a desperate fight he had had to get it adopted by the

Cabinet and how nearly it had more than once been wrecked. Even within

forty-eight hours of his bringing it forward in the House all had seemed

lost, and it was only the splendid support given him by Arthur Balfour

that had carried the day, as I understand him, by a single vote against

Chamberlain’s opposition—he did not mention Chamberlain by name. Ritchie

too had supported him, and the silent vote of Akers Douglas and the Tory

phalanx.

“Then he gave me a brief historical account of how he had engineered the

whole affair during the autumn and winter. The first thing had been to

secure the ‘Times,’ without which nothing could have been effected. He

would not say exactly how this had been done, though he promised to tell

me that and every detail some day, but I imagine Arthur Balfour must

have promised Walter his long expected peerage. Then George had used his

personal influence on the landlords, had gone to stay with Dunraven, had

encouraged Mayo, and had expostulated privately with the leaders of the

Landlords’ Convention when they proved obdurate. The result had been the

agreement come to at the Land Conference. He spoke in high praise of the

Nationalist leaders and said O’Brien had behaved splendidly, quite

justifying the character of patriotism I had given him when we had last

talked about him. It was to help O’Brien to get out of his difficult

position towards the evicted tenants that he had inserted the clause in

his Bill providing for their reinstatement.

“I told him how at a critical moment I had written to Redmond, and he

highly approved. Everything had worked out most fortunately till

Parliament met in the Spring. Then the financial difficulties had begun.

I asked him who had suggested the finance of his scheme, and he assured

me he had done the whole thing entirely himself, which is also what his

mother told me on Sunday when she described to me how he had always had

a mathematical head at school and how at an examination he had drawn

without a mistake the whole of the figures of the second ‘Book of

Euclid’ from memory. Since the meeting of Parliament, however, he had

been in most tempestuous waters. Brodrick’s Army Bill had frightened

everybody by its extravagance, and when the Funds fell to 90 he had

thought all was lost. Only Ritchie encouraged him then, and he quoted a

word of Ritchie’s that had been repeated to him. Ritchie had said,

‘Brodrick asks for millions, but he can’t explain what he wants them

for. But Wyndham explained everything and _convinced_ one—or (correcting

himself after a pause) the contrary.’ But for Ritchie, the whole thing

would have had to be abandoned as involving the Government in ruin. Then

came the loss of the two by-elections, Woolwich and Rye, and the Cabinet

meeting on Chamberlain’s return (from South Africa). What I gather from

George is that the Liberal Unionists opposed the Bill. The Duke of

Devonshire, Lords Lansdowne and Londonderry, and probably also Brodrick

and Lord George Hamilton, all these being Irish absentee landlords or

representing them.

“I asked him about Chamberlain, but he was reticent. ‘I will tell you

now,’ he said, ‘exactly what the present situation is. When I got up in

the House of Commons last week, I felt that I had my back against a wall

and was fighting for my life; and, as often happens in such

circumstances, I was able to do my very best. The question was so

complicated a one that I knew I could not hope to make it clear to

everybody, but I knew that on each section of it there was a group that

would understand on one side or other of the House. So I turned to each

in turn and got into a condition of magnetic touch with each, so that

they leaned forward towards me and I could see that they understood. So

much was this the case that, as I approached the City financial part of

my argument, I felt, though I could not see, that there was somebody

behind me in close sympathy, and I turned round and asked “Am I right?”

“Quite right,” was the answer. It was from Edgar Vincent. Thus I was

able to get through the whole speech without wearying my audience, and

at the end had succeeded in gaining the sympathy in turn of every

section. This for the moment. Since the first reading, however, and the

publication of the Bill, one of the most representative members of the

old Tory phalanx has been to Arthur Balfour and has represented to him

that much of the Bill is hard to swallow, and that the only thing that

makes it possible for them is the idea that the settlement is a _final_

one of the whole land quarrel, and that unless the Irish members will

declare in this sense there will be a revolt. The situation, therefore,

is very critical, and if you can do anything to make the Irish leaders

understand how not only I but the whole cause of Irish land legislation

may be wrecked by a lack of discretion on this particular head you will

be doing a good service, and you may use your discretion about our talk.

I have twice thought of my own resignation and political ruin a

certainty, and it may be so yet. But if it happens it will equally ruin

Irish hopes, for they will never again find an Irish Secretary who, with

my example before him, will dare to risk so much or go so far. Of course

I quite understand that the present vote may really not be quite final.

The millions may not prove quite enough, and perhaps in a few years

three or four millions may be necessary. But when the time comes and the

thing has proved a success nobody will then grudge a supplement. Only,

to declare now that it is only an instalment and not final would ruin

everything and we could not pass the Bill.’

“We then went on to talk about possible Home Rule in some form as an

ultimate result of the peace to be established in Ireland between

landlords and tenants, and he admitted that, if all united in demanding

it, it could not be refused. Indeed, George admits himself to be

theoretically a Home Ruler, though he does not consider Home Rule as yet

within the range of practical politics. The less said about it just now

the better.

“Lastly, he told me how he had captured certain Irish millionaires, and

induced them to put their capital into Irish concerns. Lord Iveagh had

promised to finance a motor company for the sale of agricultural

produce, and an Irish American publisher had offered him £100,000 for

any enterprise he liked, suggesting a paper mill on the Shannon. This

done, I went home and tried to find Redmond, and made an arrangement

with his wife to lunch with them to-morrow, and I am to report progress

to Sibell and George at breakfast on Friday.

“_1st April._—Oliver Howard called on me this morning to talk over his

plan of going to Nigeria. Being tired of London and domestic happiness,

and being Chamberlain’s private secretary at the Colonial Office, he has

volunteered for service under Lugard. Lugard has just made a raid on

Kano and Sokoto, mopping up both kingdoms ‘in Imperial interests.’

Nothing with less excuse has been perpetrated in the history of British

aggression. The two States, say with twenty millions of inhabitants,

were happy and prosperous, and peaceable, carrying on industries

established and flourishing for a thousand years, and now, to gratify

Lugard’s ambition, they are to be annexed to the pitiful British Empire,

and all the English world is pleased. Oliver tells me Lady Lugard (ex

Flora Shaw) has come home very angry with the Nigerian climate, which

has laid her on her back. I would have tried to deter Oliver from going,

as he is too good for such bad work, but he is already engaged, and all

I could do was to advise him to make it a condition he should be

employed inland, and not on the river. Still, it is about an even chance

that he leaves his bones in the country. [Which he did.]

“Lunched with John Redmond and his wife. I told him in all possible

confidence what George’s difficulty was, and the precarious position of

the Bill. He said, ‘I quite understand Wyndham’s difficulties, but you

must believe me when I say mine are quite as great. There is a party in

Ireland headed by Davitt and Archbishop Walsh that is determined to go

against the Bill, and there is sure to be wild talk at the Convention. I

saw Wyndham yesterday evening, and he told me something about the

necessity of accepting the Bill as final, not as an instalment, and I am

entirely in accordance with all he said. Of course the Bill will require

amending, but I will do my best to get it through, and let the English

imagine if they like that they are doing a fine and generous thing. But

we can’t stop the talk. I can depend thoroughly on William O’Brien who

thinks exactly as I do about it, and all our Parliamentary party, even

John Dillon, who I know does not like the Bill. He would be quite loyal

to us. The difficulty is outside. Davitt is a land nationaliser, and is

altogether opposed, and so is Archbishop Walsh. If it would make matters

easier I shall be happy to communicate with Wyndham through you, and

arrange what amendments it would be possible for him to accept. It would

be easier to do it through you than directly, for it is difficult for

him to talk quite frankly to me, and I have to go openly and knock at

his door in the House of Commons when I want to speak to him, without

knowing who there may be there with him. It would be very dangerous for

it to get about that there was an understanding between us. But if he

will do it through you it will be safe. So you must let me keep in touch

with you. I go to Ireland to-morrow till after the Convention, which

will be on the 16th. The critical time lies between this and then, and

there may be things to communicate.’

“And so it was arranged between us. I asked him what his view was about

a Catholic University. He said, ‘You must not be shocked with me if I

say I don’t care twopence about it. Of course it would be a good thing,

but it is not essential, and it is no good weighting ourselves with it

till we have got the other job through.’ This was almost word for word

the answer I gave George yesterday to the same question.

“_2nd April._—Breakfast again with George and told him of Redmond’s

proposal in regard to the amendments and of communicating through me. To

this George readily assented, and it is agreed between us that after the

Easter recess he shall meet Redmond at my house and discuss all things

amicably there. He had already met Redmond once at Dunraven’s, but it

will be much more confidential here in Chapel Street. George has to

speak to-morrow at Manchester, and will at my suggestion say something

in the direction of still further relieving the evicted tenants. I hope

it may all turn out well.

“_4th April._—A letter has come from Redmond of so important a kind that

I dare not send it on to George, but shall wait till I see him on

Monday. In it Redmond gives a list of the amendments which will probably

be adopted at the Dublin Convention, and he expresses a special hope in

regard to the King’s visit just announced for Ireland, that the King

will not receive any addresses while there. Redmond says that, while the

Irish are quite prepared to receive the King in a friendly way, they

cannot officially show loyalty.

“_6th April._—Arriving in London I went to Park Lane, where I found

George waiting for me. I showed him Redmond’s letter, and we went

through the various points of it together, and he then went into his

inner room to write an answer, leaving me to talk to Sibell meanwhile.

At the end of about three-quarters of an hour he came back with the

paper he had written, which, considering the difficulty and importance

of the questions dealt with, I hold to be a considerable feat. In it he

treats each of Redmond’s suggested amendments, agreeing to modifications

of his bill as to most of them, but putting his foot down on all demand

of increasing the bonus of twelve millions. In regard to that he says:

“‘I fear that any attempt, and above all any attempt _now_, to increase

the £12,000,000 would give a _dangerous_ advantage to those in England

who are hostile to the whole plan. _I think this is a great danger_.’

“This memorandum I am to copy out and send in my own handwriting to

Redmond, and in such a way as not to compromise George more than is

necessary on account of the great risk. ‘Chamberlain,’ he said, ‘is sure

to cross-question me as to my having had any direct communications with

the Irish Party, or come to terms with them. It must be kept absolutely

secret.’ I told him how dangerous a man I knew Chamberlain to be, and

how he had ruined all his rivals and opponents at Birmingham in times

past. It is certain that the great danger for the bill lies in him. Yet

Michael Davitt is publishing in Dublin the tale that Chamberlain is the

author of the whole Land policy, and that he means to go on and give

some sort of Home Rule in the autumn. This, no doubt, was once

Chamberlain’s policy in 1885, and he will find it difficult to oppose it

openly now, but his jealousy of George’s success may make him oppose it

secretly, and he will be without scruple. The truth of the matter is

that the Land Bill is supported now in the Cabinet by Arthur Balfour and

the Tories. It is opposed by the Liberal Unionists. Chamberlain has held

an ominous silence since his return from South Africa. I should not be

surprised if at the last moment he should join Rosebery in betraying the

bill. I was congratulating George on his having so far conciliated

everybody. ‘Wait a little,’ he said, ‘there will be opposition enough

presently.’

“I went home at once and sent off a copy of George’s memorandum to

Redmond, changing only George’s ‘I’s’ into ‘We’s,’ as if by any chance

it should fall into wrong hands it would be less personally

compromising. I could not get any answer from George about the King’s

visit.

“_7th April._—Lunched with Victor and Pamela Lytton in their new house

in Queen Anne’s Gate. They have made it very pretty, and are expecting

very shortly a son and heir. Victor goes almost daily to listen to the

debates in the House of Commons, feeling cut off from a political career

by being in the Lords. He is looking older and his face has grown

longer. I see in him a certain likeness now to his grandfather, the

novelist.

“_9th April._—To ‘Homewood’ to see Edith Lytton in her new cottage. She

took me over Knebworth, which is not at all changed since last I was

there some fifteen years ago—in the autumn of 1887, when I had been

campaigning in Ireland, and went down there to introduce George Wyndham

to Lytton. The house is a perplexing combination of good and bad

taste—true _bric-à-brac_ and sham—I am afraid mostly sham. What it wants

is whitewash and white paint. But Edith was shocked at my saying so. Her

own cottage is nice, the work of her son-in-law Lutyens.

“_20th April._—I have been in bed with influenza, my fever taking the

form of my puzzling myself with the clauses of George’s Bill and the

Dublin Convention.

“_25th April._—On Thursday, 23rd, John Redmond came to see me and gave

me an account of how he had managed the Convention at Dublin. Davitt had

given much trouble at first, but had come to terms when he found the

Convention so much against him. Sexton was still a considerable danger,

as he was clean against the bill, and if he insisted on returning to

Parliament might make things very difficult, as he was the only

financier they had among them. But when the question of his re-entering

Parliament was moved at the Convention there was such strong opposition

that it had been with difficulty Redmond had been able to prevent an

open quarrel. Sexton was ‘a queer fellow,’ but of immense ability. He

and the Archbishop, and Davitt and, if they could get him, John Dillon,

when he returned from Egypt, would make a very strong combination. He

thought I should do well to see Dillon on his arrival in London, and

tell him what the dangers were. ‘Dillon,’ he said, ‘has great confidence

in your opinion.’

“About George, Redmond said, the great thing was for him to show a

conciliatory attitude at the Second Reading in regard to amendments

generally, and not to put his foot down on particular ones, whatever he

might do in Committee afterwards. He also urged that Kilbride should be

released from prison before the second reading, as his case was one that

would be made the ground of a strong attack.

“Yesterday George came to see me. I told him about Kilbride, and he will

release him on the plea of ill-health. He will also adopt as

conciliatory a tone as he dares about the amendments. But he said the

danger from his own friends was by no means over; Chamberlain was

cunning and unscrupulous, and would trip him up if he could get an

opportunity. If he gave him any opening he would wreck the bill, getting

at Arthur Balfour and telling him it was impossible the thing should go

on.

“There has been a ‘disaster’ in Somaliland, which I hope may satisfy our

people—a dozen of our young blood-letters who made the war for their

amusement cut up, with the wretched natives they commanded. There never

was less reason for any war than this, not even a reason of possible

gold, only the lust of a rampage. If the whole of our military staff

could be made to bite the dust, the world would be a happier place. But

they won’t be satisfied. War is the new form of sport all are wild to

enjoy.

“_28th April._—George has sent me a confidential note with a new message

for Redmond. He has got a ‘touch of influenza,’ which Sibell tells me is

really nothing but a cold, an excuse for his staying indoors and keeping

himself quiet for next week, when the second reading of his Bill comes

on. Redmond, under the circumstances of his illness, had proposed to

call on him in Park Lane, but he can’t see him there, and he wants me to

be his medium of communication in discussing the amendments with

Redmond. I have sent Redmond word that it is important I should see him

at once, but so far have received no answer, and time presses.

“_30th April._—Redmond came to-day. He tells me John Dillon is back from

Egypt, very much opposed to the Bill. He does not want a reconciliation

with the landlords, or anything less than their being driven out of

Ireland. He will not, however, do anything ‘shabby’ in opposing the

Bill. But it makes the situation more difficult. Sexton is ‘bitterly

opposed,’ and has the ‘Freeman’ to back him and Archbishop Walsh.

‘O’Brien and I,’ he said, laughing, ‘have risked a great deal in taking

the attitude we did at the Convention.’ I asked him what view American

opinion took. He said ‘They don’t understand the Land Question there nor

the Bill, and they will take the view we take.’ Such being the case,

there are certain points Redmond _must_ press at the Second Reading, the

chief of which is the withdrawal of the 30 and 40 per cent. limit of

reductions; but he will not insist upon an augmentation of the bonus,

though in reality the twelve millions will not prove enough. He is to

send me a memorandum, however, this afternoon from the House of Commons,

for he is not himself well enough up in the Land Bill to put it down on

paper without consultation. He will also be happy to see George here

either to-morrow or Saturday.

“_1st May._—Redmond’s memorandum has come. In sending it he says, after

asking for Kilbride’s release from gaol:

“‘Yesterday the matter was raised at the meeting of the Irish party, and

I feel sure that some very decisive action must be taken if his

imprisonment continues much longer, and I cannot conceive why his

continued imprisonment should be apparently deliberately placed in our

path by the Government. I hope you will be able to send me good news on

this point, and should our friend desire to see me I can keep any

appointment you may make for to-morrow or Saturday.’”

The memorandum itself is long and technical, and though interesting at

the moment, I omit it here. It concludes: “I confine myself to the

points I consider vital to the success of the Bill. If there was a

certainty of satisfaction on these particulars (even though it should

not be considered advisable to make a declaration publicly on the second

reading debate), it would make it possible for us to avoid a contentious

attitude towards the Bill, and allay a growing apprehension in Ireland

(30th April, 1903).”

“To-day I went to see George. Dermot (Lord Mayo) was in the house with

him, so I was shown upstairs to the drawing-room, and there we talked.

He told me there had been a new Cabinet Council, at which his enemies,

Chamberlain and the rest, had raged, and he had been obliged to give a

promise that he would give no pledges whatever to the Irish Party before

the Second Reading, nor hold any communication with them, so I was to

consider what he told me as casual talk, and if I repeated it to Redmond

it must be merely my impression of his views—no message.”

“N.B. This is almost identical with old Gladstone’s reservation when I

asked him for a message of sympathy with Arabi in 1882. Nevertheless

George gave me pencil and paper, and I wrote notes at his dictation,

though he made me also many explanations, which I did not write. The

long and the short of the thing is that he will concede a number of

points in Committee, though he can make no pledge to do so on the second

reading. We were more than an hour over this.

“On my return home I sent at once for Redmond, who came to Chapel Street

in the course of the afternoon, and I read over my notes to him, and

told him all I could remember of George’s talk. On the whole he is

satisfied with it, and I am convinced all will go well. It has been a

great satisfaction to me to manage this matter.

“_2nd May._—Spent the morning writing a letter to the ‘Times’ about

Somaliland. This exhausted me, as I am still very weak, so weak that I

could not sit out the Irish play, to which I went in the afternoon. The

first piece was a terrible infliction, called ‘The Hour Glass,’ by

Yeats—a stupid imitation of that dull old morality, ‘Everyman,’ which

bored me so much last year. What Yeats can mean by putting such thin

stuff on the stage I can’t imagine. It was not even well acted, for

Yeats had drilled his actors to imitate Irving and other English

mediocrities. They talked pompous stage English, and were not allowed

their natural Irish accent. I felt inclined to get up and protest that

we had not come to the Irish Literary Society for that. I was indignant,

too, but it exhausted my little strength. I was determined, however, to

hear Lady Gregory’s piece, ‘Twenty-five,’ and was rewarded, for it is

quite the most perfect little work of art and the most touching play I

have ever seen acted. Only it made me weep in my weak state. I could not

stay on for the final piece, ‘Kathleen na Houlihan.’ So I went home. I

expect to see unbounded praise of the ‘Hour Glass’ in the London papers.

“_May 3rd (Sunday)._—William O’Brien came unexpectedly to see me and I

talked the Land Bill over with him. I hope he will be prudent in what he

says on the second reading, but he seems determined to press for an all

round reduction of 15 per cent., which George told me was one of the

most dangerous points, as Chamberlain is lying in wait to demand a

withdrawal of the Bill if the twelve million limit is threatened, also,

George believes, Hicks-Beach. While we were talking and I was impressing

on O’Brien George’s conversion on the Irish question, who should come in

but Percy Wyndham. ‘I see the world is very small,’ said O’Brien, ‘and

perhaps I had better be off,’ and off he went. He was to have sent

Dillon to me, but this morning I have had a note from him saying he

thinks it might have an awkward effect if the suggestion of his calling

came from him. (They had quarrelled.) Percy had been told that O’Brien

was with me and was much _intrigué_ about him. Percy, though immensely

interested in George’s success, is too old a Tory to like the Bill, and

prophesies all kinds of trouble for Ireland in the future. As to myself

I have written as follows to Redmond:

“‘I see you are asking subscriptions for the Irish Parliamentary Fund. I

have much pleasure in sending you £50. You have done such admirable

service during the past year as Leader of the Opposition, in place of

the half-hearted and unintelligent gentlemen who sit on the Liberal

Front Bench, that all lovers of Liberty here have come to look upon the

Irish Party as its sole reliable support. Also I need not say how warmly

I sympathize with your triumph in having brought our Government to the

position where it stands to-day, of having abandoned its secular policy

of governing Ireland in the interests of the English “garrison.”

“‘I look upon the new Land Bill, if as I hope it passes the second

reading, as the first piece of quite honest legislation for Ireland

which will have been carried through Parliament in my recollection, and

the certain prelude, however little the Government may have it in their

minds, some day of Home Rule. In a few years you will have the present

Landlords, who will be still considerable Land-owners in their demesnes,

all with you as enthusiastic Irishmen; and then, with the country united

for Home Rule, Home Rule must come.

“‘Therefore I wish, as always, more power to your elbow.’

“_5th May._—John Dillon came to see me early and gave me his views of

the situation very frankly. He spoke last night in support of the Bill,

but he tells me that but for loyalty to his party he should be inclined

to oppose it in Committee and vote against it on the third reading. His

view is that it is useless trying to get the landlord class on the side

of Nationalism, that they would always betray it when the pinch came,

that the land trouble is a weapon in Nationalist hands, and that to

settle it finally would be to risk Home Rule, which otherwise _must_

come. For this reason he was opposed to the Conference with the

landlords, and was opposed now in principle to the Bill. He should,

however, of course, support it, since it had been decided to do so, for

the one thing for Ireland was union in the Parliamentary Party. As long

as that was maintained they commanded the situation in the House of

Commons, and no matter what party was in power it would have to be their

servant. We then discussed the prospects of a change of Government. He

said that Rosebery would certainly be in the next Cabinet, probably at

the head of it; that though he was thoroughly contemptible as a

politician, he held them all through social influences. Harcourt was

sick, perhaps dying; Campbell-Bannerman was weak; Morley had no power of

leadership. Rosebery quite recently had made advances to Lloyd George,

the most able of the Radicals, and Lloyd George had responded. To him,

Dillon, it was a matter of indifference which of them was leader, or who

became Prime Minister. The Liberal Party could not help itself and would

be obliged to give Home Rule. All that was wanted in Ireland was

patience and to keep the Parliamentary party together. United they had

nothing to fear, even from their worst enemy, Chamberlain. I told him I

thought there was a chance of Chamberlain heading a new Unionist schism,

and that if he came into power on these lines with the popularity he had

acquired by his imperialistic antics he would disfranchize Ireland and

perhaps govern her as a Crown Colony. He did not think there was any

fear of this, but I still think there is a remote danger.

“We also discussed Somaliland, on which Dillon also spoke a day or two

ago in the House. Dillon has more statesmanship, I think, than any of

them, having a wider experience and a better knowledge of history. His

cynical view of the English parliament is fully justified. All the same,

I think he is wrong about the Land Bill, as I believe it will prove a

great step to Home Rule. But I agree with him that, whether or not it

passes, the next Government that comes into power must do the Irish

bidding. O’Brien is to speak to-day.

“_6th May._—The debate is going capitally. O’Brien spoke with moderation

and on the lines I pressed on him, especially as to the finality of the

Bill as a land settlement. He was followed by Grey, who to our surprise

has supported the Bill warmly. On Monday Arthur Balfour made an

admirable speech in support of it, and Grey’s was on the same lines. The

Tory opposition has cooled down. I look upon the second reading as

assured. George will, I think, be obliged to agree to the Irish demands

on most of the amendments in Committee, and barring accidents, the thing

is safe. Chamberlain seems to have made up his mind to a glum silence.

He had his own Transvaal fish to fry to-day.

“_10th May._—George’s Bill has passed the second reading triumphantly by

417 to 26. I believe the biggest vote on record.

“_14th May._—Chapel Street. Margaret Sackville came to lunch with me and

talk over her plan of an Irish magazine to be called ‘The Celt’ she is

trying to start. I have given her some verses for it, and have promised

some prose.

“_16th May._—To the Academy, where the most remarkable thing is

Sargent’s portrait of Cromer. Sargent has a genius for seeing and

reproducing the base passions of his sitters; and here is Cromer with

bloated cheeks, dull eyes, ruby nose, and gouty hands, half torpid,

having lunched heavily. Truly my quarrel with him is avenged. The

newspapers complain that, instead of our ‘glorious Pro-Consul,’ Sargent

has given them nothing but a full-fed obstinate Indian official.

“Found Lady Z. at home. She has enjoyed her German visits and a lunch

with the Emperor William. She found him an enormous talker without being

exactly a good talker. He talks about everything, sometimes well,

sometimes stupidly in a random, ill-balanced way. She says the Germans—I

suppose she means the German officials and aristocracy—laugh at him for

his wild utterances and constant mistakes; but he gives them no time to

complain, passing with extraordinary energy from one thing to another,

so that his blunders are forgotten; and they like him, and are in a sort

of way proud of him, as a remarkable personality who fixes the attention

of the world.

“_17th May._—A letter from Redmond about the maximum reductions, asking

that the Government should declare its intention about it. He writes:

“_15 May_ 1903.

“‘MY DEAR BLUNT.—I duly received your letter. I am handing it and the

proposed question to my brother, and asking him to look after the

matter. I cannot do so myself as I am going to Ireland on Sunday for a

few days.

“‘About the Land Bill. The crux still is the question of the maximum

reduction, and I have very great misapprehensions on this matter. If the

Government persists in keeping in the maximum reductions there will

undoubtedly be a very bitter conflict on the very first clause of the

Bill in Committee with possible recriminations between the

representatives of the landlords and the tenants.

“‘This would undoubtedly spread to Ireland, and the present unanimity of

opinion, which in my view alone makes it possible to carry the Bill, may

entirely disappear. The retention of this maximum reduction is really a

small matter, and the Government ought in my opinion seriously to

consider the responsibility of again raising a conflict between classes

in Ireland threatening the whole future as well as the passage of this

Bill. The Ulster members are all of our way of thinking, and I cannot

conceive any valid reason why the Government should stand by this

maximum. I take the very gravest possible view of the situation, and I

do hope that before it is too late the Government will make a concession

on this matter which will enable the Bill to be passed without conflict,

and which will preserve the good feeling which at present exists in

Ireland.

“‘I hope you will be able to press these views with vigour.

“‘Very truly yours,

“‘J. REDMOND.’

“_20th May._—I have been at Newbuildings since Saturday enjoying the new

oak leaves, and the bluebells. This morning I came up to London and went

at once to see George, to whom I showed Redmond’s letter. In return he

read me one he had received from Dunraven in precisely the opposite

sense, declaring the resolve of the Conference of Landlords to fight any

attempt to withdraw the maximum clause, and to get it reinserted by the

Lords if the Commons amended it. He told me the situation. On Saturday

Chamberlain went to Birmingham, and made a speech about the corn duty,

contradicting all that Arthur Balfour had just said. I feared that this

meant a revolt on Chamberlain’s part, and a bid for leadership. But

George assured me it was not so. ‘Chamberlain,’ he said, ‘is an

impulsive fellow, and, now he has blown his steam off, he has come back

pleased with himself and in a better temper. I am not afraid any longer

of his wrecking my bill. He will leave it alone. It is quite impossible,

however, that we should give up the maximum limit. The landlords won’t

stand it, and the Lords would put it back if we did.’ He then wrote me a

memorandum to show Redmond as an answer to his letter. ‘He is getting

fussy,’ he said. Armed with this I went on at once to Redmond, and

caught him at home before he went out to the House. The result is shown

in the following letter:

“37, CHAPEL STREET, _May 20_, 1903.

“‘DEAR GEORGE.—I saw Redmond at twelve, and explained to him the

situation, with the help of the notes you gave me. Also I expressed my

personal view that the maximum was not worth fighting about. He said

that he also personally thought its importance had been exaggerated. But

such was not the view taken in Ireland, where it had been much worked up

in the press, or by most of his colleagues; public opinion had gone too

far for him to be able to control it. It was largely the fault of the

Conference landlords, Dunraven and Mayo, who till the other day had

agreed with him to a withdrawal of the limit, and then for some

unexplained reason had suddenly turned round. The difference between

them would now have to be fought out on the floor of the House. It would

be so, as far as he personally was concerned, without acrimony, but by

others, he feared, with bitterness. He did not seem to think much of the

reference to the House of Lords. Within the last fortnight I have talked

with others of the Irish members, and I fear there is no doubt of there

being a growing section among them indifferent, if not hostile to the

Bill. It seems to be the general opinion that unless the tenants

specially affected are given easier terms than the Bill provides there

will be new combinations against purchase.

“‘Such is my impression of the situation. It will be a pity, having got

so far, if the concordat ends in a new quarrel, but, if what Redmond

tells me of Dunraven’s sudden change from agreement to disagreement is

accurate, it is hardly Redmond’s fault.

“‘W. S. B.’

“To this I got a brief note from George. ‘I am not pessimistic.’ Neither

for that matter am I. I don’t believe the maximum point is a very

serious one, and, even if there should be a new quarrel between the

Nationalists and the Dunraven Landlords, it won’t stop the bill, which

has gone too far now to be upset. Chamberlain was the only real danger.

“_3rd June._—Newbuildings. Prince Scherbátoff came down to see the

horses, and I went over with him to Crabbet. He is an extremely well

informed man, and gave me an excellent account of the way the

emancipation of the Russian peasantry is working out. He is himself a

very large landowner, and cultivates 30,000 acres of land with 4,000

yoke of oxen. The peasants work their own land mostly on the communal

system, preferring it. This the officials have been trying to alter, but

the Emperor has just issued a decree confirming the peasants in their

rights. There is a rule that they are unable to sell, or mortgage their

land, which protects them against the usurers. All this is very

analogous to what is proposed for Ireland, and I have promised to take

him to see George who will be pleased to hear his account.

“_5th June._—Margaret Sackville came to Chapel Street with her friend

Katharine Horner to talk about ‘The Celt.’ I urged her to put her own

name to the little venture as its only possible chance of success.

“_11th June._—The great Ministerial crisis is over for the moment, and

Chamberlain has been reduced to silence. The Government got a vote last

night of 425 against 28, the whole Opposition and the Irish Party voting

with them, against Chaplin and the Protectionists.

“_13th to 15th June._—At Newbuildings—a very delightful party. Margaret

Sackville, Katharine Horner,[2] who is a very pretty and clever girl of

sixteen, and a writer of poetry, and is quite charming, the Poet

Laureate and Meynell. The P. L. was in his best form, and Meynell amused

us all with his anecdotes of Dizzy and other heroes.

“_17th June._—Looked in at Belgrave Square where I found Madeline just

back from the House of Commons, much excited about the Irish debate in

Committee. This was stormy, and things are ticklish for the Bill. She

was enthusiastic about the speaking of the Irish members, especially

Redmond’s. George had looked up twice to the Ladies’ Gallery when it was

over. She takes it as a sign he is satisfied.

“_18th June._—To George in Belgrave Square where he is staying, and we

walked together to the Irish Office. He told me the situation, and the

danger there was from Chamberlain and from the landlords—and complained

that the Nationalists had not kept to their agreement at the Landlords’

Conference. However, he considers the worst risks over now. ‘My

position,’ he said, ‘is that of peace-maker in the Cabinet, of trying to

persuade everybody that they all have really the same opinion—at any

rate until my Bill is through. I take no side on the Preferential Tariff

question till this is safe, being a practical politician.’ All the same,

he says, it will be very necessary for him to have a talk soon with

Redmond, and he says it had better be at my house. He will let me know