FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43  
44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   >>   >|  
Occasionally, indeed, as was necessary to prevent a rupture with the Nationalists, some perfunctory mention of Home Rule as a _desideratum_ of the future was made on Ministerial platforms--by Mr. Churchill, for example, at Manchester in May 1909. But by that date even the contest over Tariff Reform--which had raged without intermission for six years, and by rending the Unionist Party had grievously damaged it as an effective instrument of opposition--had become merged in the more immediately exciting battle of the Budget, provoked by Mr. Lloyd George's financial proposals for the current year, and by the possibility that they might be rejected by the House of Lords. This the House of Lords did, on the 30th of November, 1909, and the Prime Minister at once announced that he would appeal to the country without delay. Such a turn of events was a wonderful windfall for the Irish Nationalists, beyond what the most sanguine of them can ever have hoped for. The rejection of a money Bill by the House of Lords raised a democratic blizzard, the full force of which was directed against the constitutional power of veto possessed by the hereditary Chamber in relation not merely to money Bills, but to general legislation. For a long time the Liberal Party had been threatening that part of the Constitution without much effect. Sixteen years had passed since Mr. Gladstone in his last speech in the House of Commons declared that issue must be joined with the Peers; but the emphatic endorsement by the constituencies in 1895 of the Lords' action which he had denounced, followed by ten years of Unionist Government, damped down the ardour of attack so effectually that, during the four years in which the Liberals enjoyed unchallengeable power, from 1906 to 1910, they did nothing to carry out Gladstone's parting injunction. Had they done so at any time when Home Rule was a living issue in the country an attack on the Lords would in all probability have proved disastrous to themselves. For there was not a particle of evidence that the electors of Great Britain had changed their minds on this subject, and there were great numbers of voters in the country--those voters, unattached to party, who constitute "the swing of the pendulum," and decide the issue at General Elections--who felt free to vote Liberal in 1906 because they believed Home Rule was practically dead, and if revived would be again given its _quietus_, as in 1893, by the House of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43  
44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

country

 

voters

 

Unionist

 

attack

 

Liberal

 

Gladstone

 

Nationalists

 

unchallengeable

 

damped

 

ardour


Government
 

Liberals

 

enjoyed

 
effectually
 

joined

 

passed

 

speech

 

Sixteen

 
effect
 

threatening


Constitution

 

Commons

 
declared
 

action

 

denounced

 
constituencies
 

endorsement

 

emphatic

 

proved

 

decide


pendulum
 

General

 
Elections
 
constitute
 

numbers

 

unattached

 

quietus

 

revived

 

believed

 

practically


living
 

probability

 

parting

 

injunction

 
disastrous
 

changed

 

subject

 

Britain

 

particle

 
evidence