ers of the radical wing who had been in the late
cabinet neither signed the invitation nor were present. But on the same
evening in another place, Mr. Chamberlain recognised the high qualities
and great services of Lord Spencer, though they had not always agreed upon
details. He expressed, however, his approval both of the policy and of the
arguments which had led the new government to drop the Crimes Act. At the
same time he denounced the "astounding tergiversation" of ministers, and
energetically declared that "a strategic movement of that kind, executed
in opposition to the notorious convictions of the men who effected it,
carried out for party purposes and party purposes alone, is the most
flagrant instance of political dishonesty this country has ever known."
(M84) Lord Hartington a few weeks later told his constituents that the
conduct of the government, in regard to Ireland, had dealt a heavy blow
"both at political morality, and at the cause of order in Ireland." The
severity of such judgments from these two weighty statesmen testifies to
the grave importance of the new departure.

The enormous change arising from the line adopted by the government was
visible enough even to men of less keen vision than Mr. Gladstone, and it
was promptly indicated by him in a few sentences in a letter to Lord Derby
on the very day of the Maamtrasna debate:--

Within the last two or three weeks, he wrote, the situation has
undergone important changes. I am not fully informed, but what I
know looks as if the Irish party so-called in parliament, excited
by the high biddings of Lord Randolph, had changed what was
undoubtedly Parnell's ground until within a very short time back.
It is now said that a central board will not suffice, and that
there must be a parliament. This I suppose may mean the repeal of
the Act of Union, or may mean an Austro-Hungarian scheme, or may
mean that Ireland is to be like a great colony such as Canada. Of
all or any of these schemes I will now only say that, of course,
they constitute an entirely new point of departure and raise
questions of an order totally different to any that are involved
in a central board appointed for local purposes.

Lord Derby recording his first impressions in reply (July 19) took the
rather conventional objection made to most schemes on all subjects, that
it either went too far or did not go far enough. Local government h