IRISH REDISTRIBUTION.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR."] Sin,—In a leader on a late debate, you include me with Mr-- Shaw-Lefevre and Mr. Paul, as taking refuge in the Act of Union, as asking how our opponents dared to suggest any tampering with the details of that sacred instrument, an& arguing that it would be a monstrous wrong to reduce the number of Irish Members stated by the Act of Union. If you- will refer to my speech, you will find no such suggestion by me. What I said was that while I was myself prepared for &- large redistribution, I must point out that the Conservative party had in 1885 confined themselves to suggesting a reduc- tion from 103 to 100 Irish Members,—a suggestion in which• they had not persisted, and that in the division which occurred on a proposal to reduce the Irish representation„ there had been an overwhelming majority, and a very small minority, not containing any Member who now sat on the - Conservative Front Bench. Lord Randolph Churchill, inter- rupting me, suggested that the motive leading the Conserva- tive party to take this course had been the Act of Union. replied that little stress had been laid upon the Act of Union and that the matter had been chiefly debated on the merits.— I am, Sir, &c., CHARLES W. DILICE. 76 Sloane Street, S.W., Hay 7th.
Previous page
