vain. On February 20th, upon the motion of Mr. Disraeli, the House of Commons by a vote of 250 to 100-approximately— declared that the man of the people's choice was ineligible to represent them.

Then Mitchel kept his word. He went to Tipperary, and so far as his strength-now ebbing fast away-would allow, he personally sought the suffrages of the constituency. A certain Mr. Moore, a Tory and a seeker after cheap honors, took the field against him. The polling was on March 11th, and the result was that Mitchel had 3114 votes; Moore, 746.

Mitchel again repaired to Dromolane "to rest," while Parliament deliberated. But his battles were now over; he had stood before his fellow men for the last time in vindication of the principles of liberty and patriotism to which he had devoted himself. His small remaining vitality burned away faster and faster day by day, in the heat of the conflict in which he was engaged. His spirit passed away on the morning of March 20th, about day-break, and the same roof under which he was born, sheltered his death-bed.

Thus died John Mitchel,-not in a way to be sorrowed for, I am sure, but after a manner, rather, to awaken exultation, -sustained and comforted by the trust and affection of his people, resting in the land he loved so well, facing the foe he had combated all his life, yet for the moment pausing from the strife. Death touched him gently at the end, and the peace of his closing scene was in affecting contrast with the wear and struggle of his life. He has taken as the motto of his History of Ireland, written in his later years, these lines of the poet :

"The Star of the West shall yet rise in its glory,

And the land that was darkest, be brightest in story;

I too may be gone; but my name shall be spoken
When Erin awakes, and her fetters are broken."

I have never read these lines, in this place, without a peculiar emotion. It seems to me as if this man, as the shadows began to gather about him, was granted one vision of the future.

He saw more surely than is often granted, tne destined end of the fight in which he had engaged. His mind's eye rested on the picture of an Ireland flourishing and free, and he saw that in the hearts of the people his life would not be without its recompense. Like Moses, he gazed from afar upon the Promised Land, and then he blessed God and died.

CHAPTER XCII.

OBSTRUCTION. MEN AND METHODS THAT WORRIED THE HOUSE

OF COMMONS. A NEW AND HAPPY DEPARTURE. FAMINE. LAND FOR THE LANDLESS PEOPLE. PARNELL, DEVOY, DAVITT.

HE general history of the years from 1873 to 1877, presents little that is pleasant to dwell upon. Vacillation in the Home Rule policy, division among its chiefs, weakness in its leader, defeat in all its efforts, gradually expiring confidence in the country-such are the characteristics of the time. The design of the party had been to agitate in Parliament for minor reforms; its hope, to gradually accustom England to doing justice to Ireland. One great annual debate on constitutional separation was to be secured, the result was to be left to time and Providence. I know no better way of showing how this plan succeeded, than to borrow from Mr. Sullivan's "New Ireland," a record of the efforts made in behalf of the subject nation during the period indicated, and the manner in which they were disposed of by the representatives of the ruling people:

48,

Amendment to the Address on Home Rule; March 20th, 1874; Irish vote, -ayes noes 26; defeated by 288 British votes.

Amendment to the Address on Home Rule, July 2d, 1874; Irish vote, -ayes 53, noes 37; defeated by 421 British votes.

Amendment to the Address on Home Rule, June 30th, 1876; Irish vote,—ayes 52, noes 33; defeated by 258 British votes.

Amendment to the Address on Home Rule, April 24th, 1877, shows similar results. April 17th, 1874, Irish Municipal Franchise Bill; Irish vote,―ayes 43, noes 14; thrown out by 111 British votes.

June 18th, 1874; Municipal Privileges Bill; Irish vote, -ayes 22, noes 9; rejected by 66 British votes.

April 28th, 1874; Purchase of Irish Railways Bill; Irish vote,-ayes 45, noes 6; defeated by 236 British votes.

March 23d, 1875; Irish Municipal Corporations Bill; Irish vote, -ayes 43, noes 18; thrown out by 127 British votes.

March 1st, 1875; Irish Municipal Franchise Bill; Irish vote, -ayes 41, noes 16; flung out by 160 British votes.

March 22d, 1876; Irish Fisheries Bill; Irish vote, -ayes 54, noes 6; rejected by 209 British votes.

March 28th, 1876; Irish Borough Franchise Bill; Irish vote,-ayes 57, noes 17; flung out by 162 British votes.

May 3d, 1876; Irish Registration of Voters Bill; Irish vote,―ayes 41, noes 23; rejected by 212 British votes.

July 8th, 1875; Irish Lunatic Asylum Bill; Irish vote,—ayes 28, noes 7; rejected by 111 British votes.

June 2d, 1875; Irish Land Bill; Irish vote, -ayes 44, noes 22; rejected by 279 British votes.

June 11th, 1875; Motion for Enquiry into the Working of the 1870 Land Act; Irish vote, ayes 30, noes II; rejected by 97 British votes.

June 30th, 1875; Grand Jury Reform Bill; Irish vote,-ayes 32, noes 22; thrown out by 160 British votes.

June 29th, 1876; Irish Land Bill; Irish vote,-ayes 48, noes 33; rejected by 257 British votes.

April 24th, 1877; Irish Land Bill; Irish vote, -ayes 48, noes 24; flung out by 320 British votes.

The great weakness of the Home Rule party was the lack of a clear and united purpose, and a definite scheme whereby to accomplish it. The fundamental resolutions of the Home Government Association simply contained a declaration. in favor of a separate legislature to manage the domestic affairs of Ireland, while the affairs of the Empire at large were to be entrusted to an Imperial Parliament. The adherents of the party were understood to concur in the effort to bring about such an arrangement, yet no one was "committed to any political opinion, save the desirability of seeking for Ireland the amount of self-government indicated.".

Now, the "amount of self-government indicated,” on the most liberal construction, was not enough to enkindle the popular imagination, or excite great national enthusiasm ; and it very soon became evident that nobody quite knew what the amount was. One distinguished leader of opinion was confessedly seeking repeal, pure and simple, while another was willing to give up to a purely English parliament, all international and Imperial concerns, on condition that Ireland should be allowed to do all her petty internal legislation for herself.

If any one should have known just what the Home Rule party wanted, surely that man must have been Butt. Butt, however, had no enlightenment to give the people. He wavered now in this direction, now in that, according as this or that doctrine was uppermost before the public. He never made any serious effort to define the object he sought, and still less attempted to formulate a definite system by which the difficulties incidental to Home Rule in any degree, should necessarily be accompanied. Only one point Butt seemed really determined upon,—he would not give offence to England.or her statesmen. He would agitate for minor reforms, he would calmly argue the case of Ireland, he would deferentially request attention to her grievances; but he would patiently await the time when a sense of justice would cause her masters to afford her some relief. The English government, meanwhile, treated almost contemptuously a party which had neither definite objects nor feasible schemes, and the people lost confidence in leaders who were united only in name, divided on every tangible issue.

Such was the situation in 1877, when, from the most unexpected source, a new energy, potent both in Parliament and with the people, came into being.

Charles Stewart Parnell was a young gentleman of the County Wicklow. His family had long been famous in Ireland for high mental powers, and incorruptible political virtue. The poet Parnell, to whom Alexander Pope has dedicated a poem, takes no mean rank in letters; nor did he lack regard for the country of his birth, in his day just emerging from almost the darkest period of her history. Again we find a Parnell, worthily styled by his fellow-countrymen par excellence The Incorruptible," ranking among the purest public servants of his day, and among the bitterest opponents of the Act of Union. A grandson of this gentleman married the daughter of another terrible enemy of England-Miss Delia Stewart, the daughter of that Commodore Stewart who was the father of the triumphant American navy of 1812, who himself sailed and fought through several glorious cruises the gallant frigate, Constitution,-the same Commodore who