Mr. Gladstone’s "Conversion."

Patea Mail, 11 April 1882, Page 3

Mr. Gladstone’s "Conversion."

Among things not generally known is the conversion -pf the British .Prime "Minister to the Home Rule doritfine. It is called a conversion, though it is really something else. Mr Gladstone said in the House of Commons, a few weeks ago, that he is opposed to centralisation oTgoverrirrient,' and Would favbr a scheme for removing from Parliamentary control various functions which j could be entrusted to secondary authorities. This is a cardinal principle which he .would advocate at all points as being applicable alike to England, to Scotland, and to Ireland, He did not define what are the functions which can be so removed from Imperial control; but he would rinsisfjis h!| lmutatidri|that these secondary functions shall be‘applicable to each of the three kingdoms equally. That is Mr Gladstone’s theory of Home Rule.. It is really a simple and common-place—proposition, and is the same that he has stated in Parliament in previous years when the-Holrie >Rule_ question has been under debate. A Premier needs votes, and he has been trying to trim his sail to the Home Rule breeze, by ambiguous utterances which mean loss than they sqom. He also asked Irish members what they meant by Home Rule ; and he told them that this question had not been satisfactorily answered by any Irish authority in the •House ; of Commons-—neither by the late respected leader Mr Isaac Butt, nor Jby members indhe present debate.; Mr Gladstone Knows that the main demand of Irish members is that they shall hare a separate Parliament, to manage Irish affairs. He says Scollaiid and England must have the same degree of separate control - as may be given to Ireland. If so, what chance is there for throe jeparate Parliaments,,Jo manage the secondary affairs of each kingdom ; and - above these ah imperial Parliament to manage affairs of the-Empire ? The condition imposed by'- Gladstone Would reduce Home Rule to something which Irish separaUpnists would . riot accept. Mr .Gladstone’s: so-called con- : version is therefore a serious difficulty placed as a bar :; to the Irish demand? The difference is ’ fundamental. 1 Irish mfembefs ask for the control of Irish affairs.. ;Mr Gladstone says : f, “ .You arcr entitled to exercise secondary functions’; and we will give ypu o a. separate Parliairient, and the same to Scotland, for legislating on parochial affairs.” • But a solution to this ; question is looming? ; The'colonies "Will supply it. Federation on the basis of imperial interests must soon, be conceded; and when the colonies, have to send representatives to join in legislating on affairs of| the ■■Empire,' a distinction between ■these and domestic concerns .will hare been arrived at, and .this, distinction will help .to. solve the lrish difficulty^