of the kingdom; that is a constitutional question for British electors to consider. The claim of Ulstermen is that they themselves have a right to determine their own national destiny, and even if the Home Rule Bill were endorsed by an overwhelming majority of the electors of Great Britain and Ireland, the Protestants of Ulster would still hold-and rightly hold-that they would be morally justified in resisting by force of arms any attempt to transfer them against their will to a government which they hate.

For this reason even a referendum, though it would meet the constitutional objection to the Home Rule Bill, would not meet the Ulster objection. Still less can that objection be met by the vague chance that at one or other of two prospective general elections the attention of British electors might be directed to the affairs of Ulster, and that as a result the Home Rule Act might be amended so as to permit the Protestant counties still to remain outside the authority of a Dublin parliament. This at any rate is certain, that the attention of British electors, like the attention of British Cabinet ministers, will only be directed to Ulster if Ulster makes it clear that she means to fight for her liberties. So that if the scheme of exclusion for six years were inserted in the Bill the principal effect would be to require-and to justify-the continued maintenance of the Ulster Volunteer Force. And during all that period of suspense there would be the ever-present danger that pent-up passions might suddenly blaze forth and civil war begin.

What, then, is to be done? The Liberals have brought in a Bill which they declared would prove a lasting settlement of the problem of Irish government. They find that to pass it in its present form would lead to civil war, while if they amend it so as to avoid that danger their Nationalist friends will not look at it. If the country were governed by common-sense principles instead of by party caucuses, the Bill would at once be dropped, and the leading men in Nationalist Ireland and in Protestant Ulster would be invited to confer together, and if possible to frame a measure for the better government of Ireland which could be accepted by all Irish parties. Provided such a measure were fair to the British taxpayer-which the present Bill is not-it would probably be accepted without further question by the people of Great Britain. But this

common-sense course will not be followed because the one thing a party politician will never do is to confess himself wrong. His followers will condone even the worst crime rather than pardon an honest confession of error.

Failing voluntary action on the part of the Cabinet it is the duty of the Unionist Party to press unceasingly for a referendum on the Home Rule Bill. The alternative demand for a general election does not serve the purpose. Not merely does it—as already urged-confuse the issues, but it leaves the Unionist leaders under the unpleasant suspicion of exploiting Ulster for the benefit of the Unionist Party. However sincere the spokesmen of the party may personally be in their declarations of disinterestedness, nothing will get rid of the fact that in a general election fought upon the Irish issue great pecuniary and honorific advantages will accrue to the Unionist Party if the cause of Ulster prevails. Such a fact makes the average elector suspicious-more suspicious than most politicians imagine. In the case of a referendum that suspicion does not arise. It is true that the Government-ignoring the practice of other democratic countries would probably construe the defeat of the Bill as such a blow to their pride that they would no longer hold office. But in that case they would advise the King to dissolve Parliament, and it would be in the ensuing general election, not in the referendum poll, that the country would decide between the rival claims of Liberals and Unionists for ministerial office. A referendum on the Home Rule Bill decides nothing beyond the fate of that Bill. If the Unionist leaders would take a little more pains to make this clear to the country they could win for the cause of the Union a great moral force that the ordinary intrigues of politicians will never

arouse.

A question of some importance remains. At the time of writing there seems little chance that the Government will yield another inch before the Bill leaves the House of Commons. The attitude of the House of Lords is still in doubt. The prevailing sentiment among the peers is said to be that the Bill should be again rejected on its second reading. That is mildly dramatic, but it is not common sense. The rejection on the second reading will have no other effect than to deprive the peers of the opportunity of moving amendments in committee. That is an opportunity not to be thrown away. It is true that

the Government can summarily reject the amendments, but if they are well framed the country will consider them, and it is to the public opinion of the nation that the final appeal must be made. To introduce a multitude of amendments in the hope of converting what is a thoroughly bad Bill into a workable measure would be waste of time and would merely serve to confuse the public mind. Only two amendments of substance are required. The first would provide that the north-eastern counties of Ulster should be excluded from the Bill until of their own free will they decided to come in; the second would provide that the Bill should not become law until it had received the approval of the majority of the electors on a referendum. These are the two crucial points. They have been pressed in general terms by the Unionists in the House of Commons, but it would be a great advantage to have them set down in black and white by amendments moved in the Lords. By passing the second reading so as to insert these amendments, the House of Lords in no way commits itself to the principle of the Bill; it merely recognises the fact that its power to reject the Bill has gone.

What effect this or any other course of procedure will have upon the Government cannot be predicted. In no direction is the outlook hopeful. The country is in fact engaged in a struggle for the very elements of constitutional freedom. According to the general tendency of our past experience we should expect to find the cause of freedom opposed by the Tory party and supported by the Liberals. The contrary is the case. The Liberals, for all their fine phrases about trusting the people, about the crime of coercion and the futility of force, are in effect acting the part of tyrants. The Unionists, whatever their past history may have been, whatever their future conduct may be, are at the present moment fighting for the sacred cause of English liberty. It is over their heads to-day that the banner of freedom waves.

EDITOR.

No. CCCCXLIX. will be published in July.

INDEX

Titles of Articles are printed in heavy type.