details of the scheme and in getting it into shape I received much valuable help and assistance from Sir Antony MacDonnell, for which I am very grateful to him. As is very natural, I had many long conversations with Mr. George Wyndham and with Sir Antony MacDonnell on all kinds of subjects and topics connected with Ireland-not conversations with the Chief Secretary or Under-Secretary, but perfectly informal conversations and talks with Mr. Wyndham and Sir Antony MacDonnell. Among other subjects, we have often discussed the condition of what I may call moderate opinion in Ireland, the possibility of in any way making that opinion articulate, and the possibility, in fact, of creating anything like a Moderate Central Party. I have always expressed my views freely on the matter. I thought that there did exist in Ireland a large body of moderate opinion, lethargic like moderate opinion generally is. Moderate opinion, so far as Unionists are concerned, disinclined, I thought, to any great organic changes, but profoundly dissatisfied with the existing system of Departmental Government in Ireland. I thought it dangerous that these legitimate causes of dissatisfaction felt by them should not be remedied. I thought it perfectly useless to start, or to help to create, a Moderate Party on a purely academic basis. I thought it absolutely essential to have a positive, constructive, democratic policy-the policy which has been wrought out in our proposals for devolution. On those ideas, broadly speaking, I have talked over and over again both with Mr. Wyndham and with Sir Antony MacDonnell. My impression always was-perhaps I may have been entirely wrong-that Sir Antony MacDonnell's views did not coincide with mine, but rather leaned to action on totally different lines. My impression also was that Mr. Wyndham saw no particular objection to a general scheme of administrative reform proposed by perfectly independent and private individuals being put forward for public criticism and discussion. I remember very well having conversations with Mr. Wyndham and Sir Antony MacDonnell, not on any particular scheme or idea, but on the subject of a Moderate Party generally; and it was suggested-I do not remember by whom that Sir Antony MacDonnell should invite some gentlemen to meet me who might be useful to me in forming the nucleus of such a Party. That idea was abandoned. I have a letter from Sir Antony MacDonnell, dated October, 1903, in which he says 'I have been thinking over our conversation the other day." He was referring to the conversation I have mentioned; he could not have been referring to anything else. He abandoned the idea of asking the gentlemen to meet me, because, as he writes "The business would speedily become known, and it would be said that Lord Dunraven was forming a new Irish Party.” To that Sir Antony MacDonnell did not see any particular objection, but he went on to say— "If the first meeting were held in my house, or at my invitation, everyone would say that Mr. Wyndham was a prime mover in the business." And he added Any help I can give I shall be happy to give by supplying you with facts and information, but I think, and in this Mr. Wyndham, to whom I have spoken, agrees with me, it is better I should not appear prominently, or you." even to the extent of inviting men to meet By that letter, my Lords, I have been guided ever since, and so, I believe, has Sir Antony MacDonnell. I had other talks with Mr. Wyndham last summer on this subject-if I remember rightly they were relative to certain propositions that were made to me, but which did not at all commend themselves to me—and the matter dropped until, as I have already told your Lordships, it was revived last August. I think it was on the day before the meeting of the Land Conference Comfirst spoke on this subject to Sir Antony mittee, when it was dissolved, that I MacDonnell. I then asked him for information and advice on the subject, and I cannot imagine anything more natural for me to do. We had determined to create an association; we had natural for me to do. We had deterdecided that the principal plank in our policy was an extension of self-government to Ireland; we had decided upon lines on which we were going-the lines indicated in the circular-namely, devolution, delegation of authority. I cannot the imagine anything more natural in the amended, and adopted, and published circumstances for me to do than to ask on September 26th. Shortly after that for information and advice from the man came the Chief Secretary's letter in who probably was better able to give me The Times, and shortly after that I information and advice than any other received a letter from Sir Antony human being in the country. MacDonnell to say that in the circumstances I must understand that he did The publication of our first report on August 31st led to a great clamour, in Ireland, at any rate, for fuller particulars. Personally, I was averse to giving fuller particulars at that time. I did not think that the end of August was a very good period of the year for doing business. So far as I myself was concerned, I was on a yachting cruise, but, as a matter of fact, I was out of action, being in very dubious enjoyment of complete repose, owing to a very violent attack of gout in both my feet. All my colleagues were scattered about Ireland and were difficult to get at. In these circumstances I wrote to Sir Antony MacDonnell and asked him to draft out the heads of a more elaborate scheme on the lines of our first report, and he very kindly did so and sent them down to me in Kerry. Shortly after wards he paid me a visit on his way to stay with my noble friend the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lansdowne) and spent two days with me. We had plenty of time for going very thoroughly into the matter and we pretty well mapped out a report. I was in a certain difficulty. Our first report had somehow or other been published in the London Press the day before we gave it out for publication in Ireland, which indicated a rather serious leakage somewhere in our machinery. I did not want that to occur again. I did want, however, to get a number of copies of the draft made as soon as I had perfected it to the best of my ability, and not knowing where to get them made I mentioned my difficulty to Sir Antony MacDonnell. I suggested to him, or he suggested to me—I do not know which, but I think he suggested to me--that if I would send him the draft when I had perfected it he would get sufficient copies typewritten for me to circulate among my colleagues on the organising committee, and this was done. This draft was considered by the organising committee and amended considerably. It was then brought up at a meeting of the association. considered, The Earl of Dunraven. not feel himself to be at liberty any longer to give me any assistance of any kind. That, my Lords, is, I think, the whole history of the case, and I submit to your Lordships that the charges formulated by the Solicitor-General as charges made by Irish Unionists are absolutely disproved. I deny these charges which have been made, not by Carson says, but by some Irish Unionists. the Irish Unionists, as Sir Edward For this policy the Irish Reform Association is alone responsible; it was initiated two years ago by certain members of the Land Conference Committee, out of which the Irish Reform Association was: into active existence last August without formed; and we determined to bring it consultation with, or the knowledge of, Sir Antony MacDonnell or any other human being. The whole thing was done within the action of the Land Conference Committee. Sir Antony MacDonnell, the very moment that policy was disavowed by his chief, informed me that he could no longer afford us any assistance of any kind. It is untrue to say that he pursued a policy which had been disproved of by his chief. I regret that the disavowal of our policy by the Chief Secretary did not take place a little sooner. Our first report, which was published on August 26th, set out our policy very plainly, and, goodness. knows! enough fuss was made about it to attract the attention of a much less active and intelligent mind than that of the Chief Secretary even at ordinary holiday time. But no notice was taken of it. I am curious to know whether any communication passed between the Chief Secretary and Sir Antony MacDonnell on the subject of the first report. I can only say that I received a letter from Sir Antony MacDonnell on September 25th. I think I must have written to him about the dead-set that, was being made against him in Ireland, because he writes to the effect that a friend had told him that a strenuous and most persistent effort was being made to force the Government to get him to resign his place, and he added “I am bound to say that my relations with Mr. Wyndham are such that I attach very little importance or credence to these rumours. I should gather from that letter, without any information to the contrary, that no remonstrance of any kind had been addressed by Mr. Wyndham to Sir Antony MacDonnell between the publication of our first report and our second report. But I am sure of this, that I heard nothing at all from Mr. Wyndham on the subject, and yet our first report sets out our policy pretty plainly, so plainly that I must ask your Lordships to allow me to We say that read one passage from it. We "We believe that the maintenance of the Parliamentary Union is compatible with the devolution to Ireland of a larger measure of local government than she now possesses. We consider that this devolution, while avoiding matters of Imperial concern and subjects of common interest to the Kingdom as a whole, would be beneficial to Ireland and would relieve the Imperial Parliament of a mass of business with which it cannot now deal satisfactorily, and which occupies its time to the detriment of much more important concerns. In particular we consider the present system of financial administration to be wasteful . We think it possible to devise a system of Irish finance whereby expenditure could be conducted in a more efficient and economic manner and whereby the sources of revenue could be expanded. We believe that a remedy for the present unsatisfactory system can be found in such a decentralisation or localisation o Irish finance as will secure to its administration the application of local knowledge, influence, and ability without in any way sacrificing the ultimate control at present possessed by the Imperial Parliament. That shows just as plainly as our more detailed second report our objects and intentions, yet I received no intimation of any kind from Mr. Wyndham on the subject after the publication of our first report. I do not mean to say for a moment that if I had received an intimation from Mr. Wyndham I should have refrained from pushing this policy to the best of my ability, because I believe it to be absolutely essential both for the benefit of Ireland and the maintenance of the Union. But if I had heard from Mr. Wyndham it would at least have cleared up the position between myself and Sir Antony MacDonnell, and would have prevented the necessity that I am now under of entering into this long explana tion. Sir Antony MacDonnell gave me his assistance as to the facts and information which he had promised to give in the letter of October 15th, 1903, which I have quoted to your Lordships. I was glad to have that assistance. I went to him naturally. If I had been proceeding on different lines, say on the lines of the provincial legislatures in Canada, I should have asked for information from somebody who was conversant with that system; but as we had determined to go on the lines of devolution-something in the nature of a Financial Council-I went to a man who, from his past experience in India of a system analogous to that, was best capable of giving us information. I never had any idea of concealment, and certainly the idea could never have entered the head of Sir Antony MacDonnell. Sir Antony MacDonnell knew perfectly well that I would talk this matter over with both Mr. Wyndham and Lord Dudley when I met them. Is it conceivable, in these circumstances, that any man in his senses would have given me all that information, knowing that he was bound to maintain secrecy, without asking me to connive with him in thus deceiving his superior officer? I do not know whether, under ordinary circumstances, there is anything in the least improper in a civil servant giving this kind of information. If that is so, I would respectfully suggest that it would be a good thing to have a schedule of the topics which may be discussed between a private individual and an official in his private capacity. When Sir Antony MacDonnell was appointed it was currently stated that his appointment was of a very exceptional character. Whether that is so or not, and, if so, to what extent it was exceptional, perhaps my noble friend the noble Marquess when he replies will be able to tell us; but, whether that be so or not, of this I am certain, that it never entered into Sir Antony MacDonnell's head that in giving me the assistance he did he was in any way going behind the back of his superior officer. I must apologise for taking up your Lordships' time at this length, but I think noble Lords will agree with me that the charge made against me individually and against my friends in the Irish Reform Associa- | the Lord-Lieutenant is not entirely tion is of so serious a nature that I was without a policy of his own, and occabound to justify myself before your sionally even my noble and learned Lordships from my place in this House. friend the Lord Chancellor of Ireland is I have, of course, been obliged incident- referred to in this connection, though I ally to frequently mention Sir Antony feel confident that in his case his instincts, MacDonnell by name. It is not my when he is allowed to give proper exbusiness in any way to defend him; my pression to them, are on the right side. object is to defend myself and my col- We feel that we have been badly treated leagues. But I will say this of Sir Antony by being kept so long in the dark in MacDonnell. I have not had the honour regard to this matter, and we demand to of his acquaintance very long, but I have know what official, if any, is responsible become intimately acquainted with him for these absurd schemes. during the last two or three years, and I will say that a more impartial-minded man, a man more absolutely and fearlessly honest, a man more incapable of acting in any way disloyally behind the back of his chief, it has never been my privilege to meet. *THE EARL OF WESTMEATH: My Lords, it will not be necessary for me to trouble the House at any length this afternoon, but I do not wish to let this occasion pass without expressing the relief which I, in common with all my colleagues and associates among the Unionists of Ireland, feel that His Majesty's Government, and particularly the Chief Secretary, have at length, almost at the point of the bayonet, consented to give us some explanation of this matter which has been troubling us so long. I do not think, my Lords, that it is possible for me to exaggerate the extreme sense of uneasiness which loyalists all over Ireland have been feeling at the vagaries of an official who, apparently without the sanction of his official chief, has taken upon himself to inaugurate a policy in Ireland which we Unionists emphatically and entirely disapprove of, and from which we wish in every way to dissociate ourselves. All over Ireland the feeling has been one of great unrest, because we never know in Ireland whom we ought to attack. The Chief Secretary is nominally responsible to Parliament for Irish administration, but, rightly or wrongly, an impression has gained ground that the present Chief Secretary, Mr. Wyndham, has practically abdicated the position he ought to occupy, and the power has gradually passed from his hands into those of his official junior. There are even rumours that no less a person than The Earl of Dunraven. I am one of those who do not like making a scapegoat of any one particular person unless I feel perfectly confident that that is the person who deserves the blame. For that reason I have, in common with many others, felt the greatest reluctance in joining in the campaign, as it has been called, which has been conducted against Sir Antony MacDonnell all over Ireland and in this country; but when we find so important an official as the Attorney-General for Ireland breaking what I believe was the silence of years and going up to his constituents and urging them to insist upon the origin of this scheme being announced publicly, and when we find no less a person in England than the Solicitor-General also insisting on this point, then it is perfectly plain that some such pronouncement as was made yesterday by the Chief Secretary becomes absolutely necessary. I think the statement which the Chief Secretary made yesterday has abundantly justified the attitude which we Unionists in Ireland have been forced to take. I certainly think this matter is one which should have been set at rest before. He The noble Earl, Lord Dunraven, who has occupied so large a share of public attention lately, has been appealed to over and over again to set this matter at rest. He has chosen not to do so. has preferred to allow the unrest to go on. I do think this is a serious want of thought on the part of one who has lately been hailed by the somewhat exclusive title of the most thoughtful man in Ireland by one of that small but enthusiastic group of admirers who follow the noble Earl about from place to place, and who appear to play very much the same part as the Chorus in the Greek plays. I think His Majesty's Government, a good thing. At the same time, I have knowing the unrest which has existed all never heard that any body has been over Ireland, might have taken an earlier suggested which would command the opportunity of disavowing any connec- confidence of Unionists and Nationalists tion on the part of the Government with alike. I am very much afraid that if any this scheme. I think they have shown a tribunal of this kind could be constituted self-denial and a meekness worthy of it would fall under the sinister influences earlier days when we consider that not so which have made the position in Ireland very long ago Sir Antony MacDonnell what it is to-day. I wish, however, to went down to the West of Ireland and say that if at any future time anything there permitted himself to receive an of this kind should be proposed I do not address from the Nationalist body con- think Unionists should be considered gratulating him on his superior breadth of bigoted if they scrutinise such proposals mind, and his general superiority over the with great care and caution. The time rest of his colleagues. I believe that was may possibly come when Unionists and so. I have never seen any contradiction Nationalists may be able to work together, of it, and I think a more improper action but that time has not come yet; and any for a civil servant to take it would be attempt to force a union on lines which impossible to imagine. are not generally accepted by the country will only lead to trouble and annoyance and a repetition of the painful incident we are discussing to-day. Let us hope, my Lords, that this showup, if I may call it so, this fiasco will bring about the end of the policy of which we so bitterly complain-the policy of truckling to disloyalty and trying to conciliate those who will not be conciliated. The ignorance of people in this country with regard to Irish affairs never seems to grow less. As a small matter, I may mention that a few days ago I was travelling over from Ireland with an Englishman who had been spending a week in that country. He said, in the course of conversation, Oh, you have no more real grievances in Ireland. You only bring them forward pour rire." When I recollected that the whole of his time had been spent in official circles in Dublin I was not so much astonished at that remark as I otherwise would have been. I would appeal to my noble friend Lord Dunraven to leave Ireland alone in future. He has taken up the land question, the University question, and Home Rule in disguise. Now, I earnestly suggest to him that he should remain in this country and take up some question here which will give vent to his great energy. What we want in Ireland is to be let alone. We want to manage our own affairs. We want to be free from agitators and faddists with, no doubt, excellent intentions. Let THE EARL OF MAYO: My Lords, I am sure the House will agree with me that Lord Dunraven has, to say the least, cleared the air in regard to this question of devolution. We now know that the scheme originated with the noble Earl and his colleagues, and that he consulted with the Under-Secretary upon it. me leave that for one moment and allude to the speech which has just been made by my noble friend Lord Westmeath. The noble Lord has attacked everyone all round; he has attacked the Government; he has attacked the Chief Secretary; he has attacked Lord Dunraven; and he has attacked the Under-Secretary. Living in Ireland as I do, and taking a great interest in affairs there, I feel quite certain that the Chief Secretary can well take care of himself, especially after his pronouncement in denial of the devolution policy which appeared in The Times. I quite understand the attitude which Lord Westmeath has taken up, because he was one of those noble Lords who, at the time we were trying to arrive at a little peace in Ireland, set his face entirely against it. He was one of those with whom we had the greatest difficulty in dealing, and therefore your Lordships must not take quite seriously all the very hard words he has just uttered. With regard to the question of Private Bill legislation, there is a general feeling As I was a member of the Land Conthat if something in the nature of devolu- ference I should like to take this public tion could be brought about it would be, opportunity of denying that there was |