MR. BALFOUR'S FEELING FOR IRELAND.
WE suppose it is impossible to convince the Glad- stonian electors that the heart of the Unionist Party, so far from being anti-Irish, is very genuinely set upon promoting the happiness, peace, and prosperity of Ireland. 'Whether, however, they believe it or not, that is, we venture to affirm, as true of the Unionist leaders, as true of Lord Salisbury, of Mr. Goschen, of Mr. Chamber- lain, of Mr. W. H. Smith, of Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, and last, but most of all, of Mr. Balfour, as it is of Mr. Gladstone, of Lord Spencer, of Mr. John Morley, of Sir G. Trevelyan, or Mr. Campbell-Bannerman The difference we believe to be merely this, that while the leading Glad- .stonians have set their heart on giving Ireland political independence first, and physical and social prosperity after- wards, the leading Unionists have set their heart on giving Ireland physical and social prosperity first, and such amount (and no more) of political independence after- wards as may be perfectly consistent with the political unity and prosperity of the United Kingdom. It is, of course, open to either party to contend that their wish for Ireland is more truly in keeping with the wish of disinterested Irish patriots than the wish of their opponents, and into that question, as it revives the whole of the old, old controversy, we have no intention at present of entering. But we do heartily desire that the -" balancing electors," as Mr. Goschen calls them, should -take the pains to consider carefully for themselves which of the two parties really seems to care the most heartily, without prejudging the particular course to be taken, for the welfare of the Irish people. We are far from saying that both parties do not share the same earnest wish to serve Ireland. We believe that, on the whole, they do. But we are perfectly sure that the Gladstonians have not got any monopoly of that wish, even if they indulge it as heartily and as impartially as the Unionists. The anti- Irish feeling imputed to the Unionist Party is a pure and -wild myth, except so far as it expresses disgust at the methods recently adopted by the Parnellite Party,—at -the obstructionist manoeuvres in the first place which have paralysed the British Parliament, and at the very per- severing attempts to render the steady government of Ire- land impossible, which have been the boast of the Parnellite Party in the second place. Unionists are not in the least anti-Irish in any sense which means that they cannot fully appreciate Irish genius, Irish wit, Irish humour, Irish industry, and Irish sufferings, as well as Irish tenacity of purpose. We recognise to the full the debt which England -owes to the Irish element in the national character. We believe that, without Ireland, we might lose as much as France would lose by the loss of the Alsatian element in the French character. We dread the loss for ourselves that would result from the substitution of a looser and more ambiguous tie for the present Union, at least as much as we dread the loss for Ireland. But we -dread it honestly for both. We believe that England would lose greatly by losing Ireland, though it might be some time before we realised our loss. And we believe -that Ireland would lose still more in losing England, and that Irish stability and prosperity could never again recover the calamity which Separation would bring, even if for a time an only partial separation did stimulate. Irish hopefulness and Irish ambition.
Let us test the true feeling of. the Unionists on the subject of Irish prospects by Mr. Balfour's remarkable speech at Liverpool on Tuesday last. Who can read that speech with a calm desire to get at Mr. Balfour's real feeling to Ireland, without seeing that this Irish Secretary, who is called by all the opprobrious names which Irish ingenuity can invent, is actuated by a very profound, not ito say a very passionate, desire to bring substantial and permanent relief to Irish sufferings, and by a most ardent pity for Irish misery. To read Mr. Balfour's account of the almost tragic contrast between Irish squalor on the Donegal coast and the extreme grandeur -of the scenery into which you emerge from the wretched villages in which the poor peasantry just contrive, in favourable times, to pick up enough by the accumula- tion of various scraps of different kinds of labour to keep soul and body together ; to note the careful study he had made of the hand-to-mouth character of the Irish agriculture, the devices of summer emigration in one dis- trict, of children's labour in another, of women's needlework in a third, of hand-to-mouth fisheries still more inadequate to their purpose than even the hand-to-mouth agricul- ture in a fourth ; to note the clear conviction he had .arrived at, that what is wanted is not so much occasional help in regularly recurring seasons of scarcity, as trans- formed habits of labour which will enable the Irish peasant to do one thing thoroughly well, instead of a good many things imperfectly, so as to lay by in seasons -of plenty for the seasons of comparative want, and to earn more even in those seasons of comparative want than they slow earn in seasons of what they call prosperity,—to read, we say, Mr. Balfour's study of all these conditions of Irish life on the Western Coast, is to be convinced, unless the conviction is positively and wilfully resisted, that his heart is as full as it is possible for it to be of genuine enthusiasm for the amelioration of the whole character of Irish life in those districts, and its restoration to the higher type which it assumes in the less poverty-stricken regions of the island. What Mr. Balfour said on the subject showed not only his pity for those who habitually live in these narrow straits between starvation and penury, but his cordial respect for the higher qualities displayed by the Irish- men who have to deal with these severe trials. The tone in which he spoke of the priests and peasants with whom he conversed, of their complete political inde- pendence of tone, and yet the frank cordiality they showed in giving him all the insight they could into the best means of improving the condition of their district, sufficiently proved that it was not in the spirit of mere patronage that he went there, but that he saw all that was manly and brave and self-denying in the Irish life he was studying, as well as all that was sad and miserable and distressing. He was not thinking merely of how to tide the poor people over a time of great difficulty, but how to prevent these periods of calamity, and almost of catastrophe, from recurring. He saw what was most hopeful in the Irish character, as well as what was least hopeful. He saw that if they could be got to take more pride in their work, and to concentrate their energies more completely on one kind of work, instead of merely endeavouring to keep hunger at bay ; to farm well, instead of to farm with the least possible expenditure of capital ; to fish well, with all the proper appliances, instead of merely to use wretched boats and wretched tackle to pick up a miserable pittance in fair weather,—in fact, to make of fishing or farming a true art, instead of a mere method of keeping the wolf from the door, the Irish even of these poorest districts of Ireland might become quite a different race. But, of course, as Mr. Balfour sees, pride in an art cannot be implanted in a day, or a month, or a year, even if, as Mr. Morley so passionately desires, a Parliament on College Green were thrown in to stimulate their pride. The habits of life must be gradually changed ; a certain professional training must be gone through, and a certain emulation in pro- fessional feeling must be inspired, before the habits of life can be so changed. Still, our point is now, that Mr. Balfour's speech shows thorough sympathy with the Irish people in these respects, not mere pity for them. No one, we think, can read his speech in an impartial spirit and not feel deeply convinced, that though there cannot be in the Unionist statesmen any indifference to the welfare of the United Kingdom as a whole, or any disposition to fix the mind exclusively on Ireland, as so many of the Home-rulers appear to do, there is in them, and in the most representa- tive of them, a zeal for the permanent good of Ireland which is not surpassed by Mr. Gladstone himself, and is not even approached amongst the ordinary rank and file of the Parnellite tail.
Previous page
