elf off from its authors, was to be expected. They
made the most of it. (M132) But he was the last man to be turned aside
from the prosecution of a policy that he deemed of overwhelming moment, by
any minor currents. Immediately after the election, Mr. Parnell had been
informed of his view that it would be a mistake for English and Irish to
aim at uniform action in parliament. Motives could not be at all points
the same. Liberals were bound to keep in view (next to what the Irish
question might require) the reunion of the liberal party. The Irish were
bound to have special regard to the opinion and circumstances of Ireland.
Common action up to a certain degree would arise from the necessities of
the position. Such was Mr. Gladstone's view. He was bent on bringing a
revolutionary movement to what he confidently anticipated would be a good
end; to allow a passing phase of that movement to divert him, would be to
abandon his own foundations. No reformer is fit for his task who suffers
himself to be frightened off by the excesses of an extreme wing.

In reply to my account of the conversation with Mr. Parnell, he wrote to
me:--

_Hawarden, December 8, 1886._--I have received your very clear
statement and reply in much haste for the post--making the same
request as yours for a return. I am glad to find the ---- speech is
likely to be neutralised, I hope effectually. It was really very
bad. I am glad you write to ----. 2. As to the campaign in Ireland,
I do not at present feel the force of Hartington's appeal to me to
speak out. I do not recollect that he ever spoke out about
Churchill, of whom he is for the time the enthusiastic
follower.(226) 3. But all I say and do must be kept apart from the
slightest countenance direct or indirect to illegality. We too
suffer under the power of the landlord, but we cannot adopt this
as a method of breaking it. 4. I am glad you opened the question
of intermediate measures.... 5. Upon the whole I suppose he sees
he cannot have countenance from us in the plan of campaign. The
question rather is how much disavowal. I have contradicted a tory
figment in Glasgow that I had approved.

At a later date (September 16, 1887) he wrote to me as to an intended
speech at Newcastle: "You will, I have no doubt, press even more earnestly
than before on the Irish people the duty and policy of maintaining order,
and in these instances I s