supreme power, the creation of an Irish Parliament could not affect the complete legal supremacy of the imperial Parliament. The Irish Parliament would be the creature of the imperial Parliament, and it could be modified or extinguished by the act of the Parliament that created it. Since the demand for statutory home rule took the place of the demand for repeal of the Act of Union, it has been clear to the Irish leaders that an Irish Parliament would not be a coördinate legislature, united with Great Britain only by the link of the crown, but would be in the same position as any colonial Parliament.

It was at the end of January, 1886, that the Salisbury ministry resigned, and on February 1 Gladstone became prime minister with the definite understanding that he was to introduce a home-rule bill. Five prominent members of his previous cabinet refused office-Hartington, Derby, Northbrook, Goschen and Bright. Chamberlain waited until he had seen the draft of the bill before casting in his lot with the Unionists, but resigned in March, before the bill was made public. With his forces thus weakened, Gladstone introduced his first Home Rule Bill in the House of Commons on April 8, 1886. After four days of hot discussion, the bill was allowed to pass its first reading without division, and the second reading debate began on May 10. So great was the opposition offered to certain clauses of the bill by members of his own party that Gladstone offered to withdraw it and to bring forward an amended bill in the autumn session. This overture was refused, and the division was finally taken in the early morning of June 8. Gladstone was beaten by thirty votes-313 to 343—and as there was no possibility of getting a working majority for either Liberals or Conservatives, Parliament was dissolved. The general election which followed gave the Conservatives 316, the Liberal-Unionists 78, the Liberals 191 and the Irish Nationalists 85 seats. Conservatives and Unionists combined had thus a majority of 118 over Gladstone's party reinforced by the Nationalists.

For six years the question of home rule was in abeyance; but when the Parliament of 1886 came to an end in 1892, it was recognized that the general election must be fought largely,

if not primarily, on this issue. Great difficulties surrounded the question. The Liberals were not in agreement as to the terms of a home-rule bill. Parnell's downfall and death had weakened the Nationalists and alienated many Liberals from the Irish cause. The Conservative government, moreover, spurred by its close association with the Liberal Unionists, had stolen much Liberal ammunition; it had reformed Irish county government in 1888, and it had attempted to settle the Irish land question by the acts of 1887 and 1891, which provided for the purchase by tenants of their holdings with the aid of government credit. The elections again placed the balance of power in the hands of the Irish Nationalists: Conservatives and Liberal Unionists, 315; Liberals, 274; Nationalists, 81. The support of the Nationalists was essential to a Liberal government, and the price of this support was Gladstone's second Home Rule Bill of 1893. This bill was introduced in the House of Commons on February 13, 1893. Its passage through the House of Commons occupied eighty-five sittings. Through all its stages it was piloted by the prime minister, who at eighty-three years of age showed marvelous energy and mental power in his management of the parliamentary proceedings, Second reading was carried on April 21, by a vote of 347 to 304, and the bill passed its final stage in the House of Commons on September 1 by a majority of thirty-four. Its career in the House of Lords was brief. Its second reading was moved by Earl Spencer on September 5, and, after three days of debate, it was rejected by a vote of 419 to 41. The Liberal government continued in office until June, 1895, Lord Rosebery taking Gladstone's place as prime minister in March, 1894. On the downfall of the Rosebery ministry, Lord Salisbury again took office, and the elections of 1895 put the Liberals in a minority which lasted until 1906.

Neither the general election of 1900 nor that of 1906 was fought on the home-rule question. In 1900 the dominant issue was the Boer War, and in 1906 it was understood that no home rule bill would be introduced by the Liberals, if they were given a majority, until after another general election. In 1906 only 158 Conservatives and Liberal Unionists were returned to Par

liament, and the Liberals had a majority of 186 over Conservatives and Irish Nationalists combined. The crisis over the budget of 1909 brought this Parliament to an end, and in the election of January, 1910, the Nationalists resumed their position as arbiters of the destinies of British governments: Conservatives and Liberal Unionists, 273; Liberals and Labor members, 315; Nationalists, 82. The work of this Parliament was first to pass the budget and then to settle the question of the Lords' veto. The Nationalists faithfully supported their Liberal allies throughout the memorable session of 1910, knowing that the reduction of the power of the House of Lords was even more essential for the success of home rule than it was for the carrying through of the other reforms in the Liberal program. A second general election was necessary before the House of Lords could be induced to perform the self-denying act of passing the Parliament Bill. This election was fought in December, 1910, and the result was to leave parties much as they were after the January election. Again the Nationalists held the balance of power in the House of Commons: Conservatives and Unionists, 272; Liberals and Labor members, 314; Nationalists, 84.

The time had now come for the Nationalists to claim the reward for their support of Liberal governments. The session of 1911 was devoted to the Parliament Bill and to Mr. Lloyd George's scheme for national insurance: but even before the opening of Parliament, in February, 1912, Mr. Churchill had made his memorable speech at Belfast, in which he outlined the intentions of the Liberal government in regard to the forthcoming Irish bill. The new bill was introduced in Parliament on April 11, and was vigorously debated before it was allowed to pass its first reading. Mr. Asquith made the introductory speech. He was followed by Sir Edward Carson, the spokesman of the Ulster Unionists, who strenuously opposed home rule for Ireland in general and the provisions outlined by Mr. Asquith in particular. Mr. John Redmond accepted the bill for the Nationalists. Mr. Ramsay McDonald gave the sanction of the Labor party to the new bill; he rejoiced in the prospect that the Irish workers in England would henceforth be free to

vote for their own interests, instead of being constrained to consider only the interests of the home rule cause in Ireland. Viscount Castlereagh, recalling with pride the share of his family in bringing about the Union, claimed that there was no good reason for attempting to pass a home rule bill; he asserted that the results of the Union had been beneficial both to England and to Ireland, and that to grant home rule would simply mean that the old struggle of 1800 would have to be repeated. Mr. William O'Brien's criticism of the bill was directed against the financial clauses. He objected to a dual control over the Irish purse and asked for freedom for Ireland to raise and spend her own revenue.

The most notable speech on first reading, after that of the premier, was Mr. Balfour's. With his usual ability for seeing both sides of a question, Mr. Balfour criticized the bill as offering at the same time too much and too little. From the point of view of a thorough-going democrat, he asserted, the bill was a half measure, full of inconsistencies. It was also utterly unworkable. It was an attempt to bring about a federal union. without federal machinery. A bill granting self-government to the Irish and yet withholding from them the essentials of selfgovernment, removing the Irish from the sphere of legislation by the British Parliament and yet leaving Irish members at Westminster to vote on English and Scotch affairs, was "lopsided federalism." Ireland either is or is not a separate nation, was his argument. If Ireland be a nation, what right has England to safeguards and supremacy? If Ireland be not a nation, why home rule at all? If she be a nation, the privileges and powers granted her are not nearly enough; if she be not a nation, they are far greater than ought to be conceded.

The debate was closed on April 16 by Mr. Birrell, the Irish secretary, who gave a brief review of the utter failure of England to govern Ireland. Eighty-six coercion acts, he told the House of Commons, had been asked by English governments from Parliament since the Union; and yet, in spite of this special legislation, the government had failed to keep order and peace in Ireland. Leave to introduce the bill was granted by a vote of 360 to 226. The motion for second reading was made

on April 30. Speeches were made on both sides by nearly all the leading members of the House who had not spoken on first reading. There was another speech from Balfour, in which he criticized severely the reservation of certain services by the imperial government. He especially attacked the clauses of the bill dealing with the royal Irish constabulary. The Irish government was to be responsible for law and order in Ireland, and yet under the bill the government could not dismiss a single policeman or raise or lower the pay of a sergeant or a constable. The arguments based on the unwillingness of the Protestants of Ulster to come under an Irish Parliament were put forward by Sir Charles Beresford and by Mr. Bonar Law, the Conservative leader; they were answered, for the government, by Mr. Herbert Samuel, the postmaster-general, and by Sir Rufus Isaacs, the attorney-general. The debate was conIcluded by a short speech from Mr. Asquith, and the second reading was carried by a vote of 372 to 271. Committee stage lasted from June 11 to December 12; report stage from December 30 to January 13; and on January 16 the bill was sent to the House of Lords, after passing its third reading by a majority of 110. In order to make any headway with the bill it had been found necessary to use the closure freely. Out of the 1646 lines in the bill, 212 only were debated while 1434 were carried under closure without any opportunity for debate. The only amendments carried were those proposed by the govOf these there were 143: 84 at committee stage and 59 during report stage.

ernment.

On one occasion during committee stage, on November 11, the Conservatives by a snap vote defeated the ministry and carried an amendment reducing the financial assistance which the Irish government was to receive from the imperial treasury. This amendment was carried by 22 votes, and, had the clause as amended remained part of the bill, it would have made the whole scheme unworkable. The following evening Mr. Asquith moved to rescind the vote; the speaker ruled that the motion. though without precedent, was in order; and then followed a wild scene of fury and disorder on the part of the opposition. The House of Commons was adjourned for several days, the