1868.]

TRADES-UNION OUTRAGES.

335

maker who dismissed union-men had his shed burnt by naphtha, and much valuable property consumed. Other masters give up business from fear of being assassinated. Thousands of needles were put into brickmakers' clay to injure the hands of non-union men who refused to obey the tyrannical behests of the union. Persons employed to protect property from these and other attempts were shot at, wounded, and even murdered; a favourite mare was roasted to death in a slow agony, lasting for more than two hours. Such were the means by which some of the Manchester unionists sought to enforce compliance with their tyrannical orders; and those in other places were not far behind them.

The indignation which the conduct of these fiends naturally rouses must not be allowed to blind us to the fact that the outrages of which they were guilty were the results of class legislation, arising from a want of proper representation in parliament of the class of which the tradesunions were composed. The protection of the law was refused to these societies even when they confined themselves to objects which were clearly legitimate, and the consequence was that they attempted to compass their aims by means which were illegitimate. If the law would not protect them, they would defy the law. Thus it always happens that injustice is as pernicious to those whose interests it is designed to advance as to those against whom it is employed. To this fact the eyes of the legislature have been opened, thanks in no small degree to the investigations of the trades-union commissioners; and the result of legislation founded on justice has been that outrages such as those we have recorded have become almost or altogether things of the past.

The session of 1868 found the Derby government, as the session of 1867 had left it, face to face with a liberal party greatly superior in numbers, but too divided to be easily combined in any movement for its overthrow. Mr. Disraeli therefore continued to employ the tactics which had hitherto enabled him to escape a fatal defeat, dexterously evading the questions on which the opposition would be likely to unite against him. The Irish and Scotch reform bills had still to be passed, and the desirableness that they should be carried through parliament by the same admi

nistration that had superintended the English bill formed a plausible excuse for the still farther retention of office by the ministry of a minority. It was a state of things wholly without parallel in the history of the country; but it was urged that the circumstances in which they had been placed by the errors and divisions of their opponents were also unprecedented.

As the session had been formally opened in the autumn of 1867, the two houses had only to take up their business where they had left it and as they had left it. They commenced their sittings on Thursday the 13th of February, on which day Mr. Disraeli with praiseworthy promptitude introduced a bill having for its object the more effectual prevention of corrupt practices at parliamentary elections. The plan he proposed was to create a court composed of three eminent members of the legal profession, with a salary of 20007. per annum each, who were not only to decide on all election petitions, but to hear appeals from the decisions of revising barristers.

The health of Lord Derby had long been failing; he was weary of the duties of office, which, indeed, his growing infirmities disabled him from discharging with his wonted ability and efficiency. His resignation had long been expected, and it was formally announced on the 25th of February in the upper house by Lord Malmesbury, and in the lower by his son, Lord Stanley. It was added that the Queen had commanded Mr. Disraeli to form, if possible, a new administration, and that he had accepted the task. An adjournment, as a matter of course, was agreed to in the Commons: but the Lords continued their sittings in order to pass a bill for the suspension of the habeascorpus act in Ireland. Mr. Disraeli carried out the commands that had been given him by inducing his colleagues to remain in office, with the exception of Lord Chelmsford, who was succeeded in the chancellorship by Lord Cairns. Of course he himself became first lord of the treasury, and Mr. Ward Hunt took the office of chancellor of the exchequer. When the House of Commons again met, on the Friday after the day of its adjournment, a farther adjournment to the following Thursday was asked for by Lord Stanley, and somewhat reluctantly conceded by Mr. Gladstone.

THE PREMIERSHIP OF MR. DISRAELI.

337

;

1868.] Mr. Disraeli had attained the height of his ambition he now stood the foremost man in that very assembly which had once covered him with shouts of derision. The alteration that had taken place in the personnel of the ministry brought with it little change in its policy. The infirmities of Lord Derby had for some time past prevented him from taking an active part in the direction of the government, and had caused him to devolve the whole guidance of affairs on his skilful lieutenant. The only real change, therefore, was, that Mr. Disraeli, who had all along been the real chief of his party, now became its recognised leader, no longer fettered by the necessity of consulting the nominal head of the government. If he felt elated by his elevation, he carefully concealed the feeling, and spoke with the air of a man who bore his honours meekly, and was heavily oppressed by the burden of the responsibility laid on him. When he addressed the House of Commons for the first time after his appointment, he said that he succeeded to the place and policy of the Earl of Derby. He might have said that he carried on the policy which he himself had inaugurated before he occupied his present position. He added, that he would pursue a liberal policy; and when the House laughed at the statement, he qualified it by saying emphatically, a truly liberal policy; a declaration at which the House laughed still more loudly. He then proceeded to explain that the policy he meant to describe by the term 'liberal' was one that would not shrink from any changes required by the wants of the age, but would never forget that it is our happy lot to dwell in an ancient and historic country, rich in traditionary influences that are the best security for order and liberty, and the most valuable element of our national character and strength. It can hardly be denied that these declarations were somewhat vague, and might have been made with at least equal truth by the leader of the opposition.

Mr. Bouverie moved an adjournment, in order to enable him to express his opinions on the state of parties in the House. He asked, 'Why are the conservatives now in power? Simply because the liberal party, though an undoubted majority in this House, and representing a vast preponderance of opinion in the country, does not deserve

VOL. III.

Z

to be called a party. That may be an unpalatable truth, but it is a truth notwithstanding. We have leaders that won't lead, and followers that won't follow. Instead of an organised party, we are little better than a rabble.'

When the legislature got fairly to work after the interlude caused by the changes that had taken place in the ministry, the affairs of Ireland once more demanded and obtained a large share of its attention. It was felt that the Fenian agitation-base, cowardly, and contemptible as it was in itself was the outward symptom of a deep-seated social and political cancer, which must at any cost be eradicated. The subject was brought forward by Mr. Maguire, who, in a speech of remarkable force and eloquence, proposed that the House should resolve itself into a committee to take into its immediate consideration the condition of Ireland. The motion was resisted by the ministry; who, in opposing it, clearly showed that, while they admitted the evils to which Ireland was a prey, they had no policy to propose which was calculated to deal with them effectually. In the course of the debate Mr. Gladstone let fall the word 'disestablishment,' and the thunders of applause which the expression elicited showed that a very large party in the House felt that the measure thus indicated was a necessary preliminary to the application of the other remedies for the chronic and inveterate maladies of Ireland, and made it evident that if Mr. Gladstone would propose it, he would obtain the strong, earnest, and united support of the great liberal party-both in the House and the country. Mr. Disraeli, who followed him, met the enthusiastic demands of the opposition party with a firm declaration of his determination to resist with all his power any attempts that might be made to overthrow the Irish church, and with an ingenious argument in favour of the union between church and state. The debate was the most important of the session, we may almost say of the generation; it marked out the ground on which the two parties, now opposed to one another, were to fight out their battle. Mr. Maguire's motion was withdrawn; but in accordance with the views he had announced the leader of the opposition gave notice, amidst the loud cheers of his supporters, of his intention to move the following resolutions :

1. That in the opinion of this House it is necessary

1868.]

MR. GLADSTONE'S RESOLUTIONS.

339

that the established church of Ireland should cease to exist as an establishment, due regard being had to all personal interests and to all individual rights of property.

2. That, subject to the foregoing consideration, it is expedient to prevent the creation of new personal interests by the exercise of any public patronage, and to confine the operations of the ecclesiastical commisssioners of Ireland to objects of immediate necessity or involving individual rights, pending the final decision of parliament.

3. That a humble address be presented to her Majesty, humbly praying that, with a view to the purposes aforesaid, her Majesty will be graciously pleased to place at the disposal of parliament her interest in the temporalities of the archbishoprics, bishoprics, and other ecclesiastical dignities and benefices in Ireland and in the custody thereof.'

The resolutions thus announced were brought forward by Mr. Gladstone on Monday the 30th of March. He began by formally moving that the acts relating to the Irish church should be read. Whereupon, to the dismay of the House, Colonel Knox moved that the Act of Union should be read. Eventually it was agreed that only those clauses of it relating to the Irish church should be read, which was done accordingly. Mr. H. E. Surtees requested that the Act of William and Mary prescribing the coronation oath should be read; and his request was complied with. Mr. Gladstone then moved that the House should go into committee on the resolutions of which he had given notice. Lord Stanley then moved the following resolution:

'That this House, while admitting that considerable modifications in the temporalities of the united church in Ireland may, after the pending inquiry, appear to be expedient, is of opinion that any proposition tending to the disestablishment or disendowment of that church ought to be reserved for the decision of the new parliament.'

In speaking on his motion Mr. Gladstone said: 'If I were asked as to my expectation of the issue of the struggle, I begin by frankly owning that I, for one, should not have entered into it unless I believed that the final hour was about to sound. I hope the noble lord will forgive me if I say that, before Friday last' (the day on which Lord Stanley gave notice of his resolution), 'I thought the thread of the remaining life of the Irish established church