something of a better feeling for the political world which gave me such a staunch & kind friend, & such a true & loyal colleague. God bless you.

An action for libel brought by Mr O'Donnell, formerly a Home Rule member of Parliament, against the Times,' revived at this time the whole question of the "Parnellism and Crime" papers in their bearing upon the Irish party. On July 6 Mr Parnell rose to make a personal explanation, and repeated his repudiation of the facsimile letter, and repelled the other charges made by the 'Times' writer. Six days later he asked the First Lord of the Treasury if the Government would consent to the appointment of a Select Committee to go into the question of the authenticity of certain letters read by the Attorney-General at the trial of O'Donnell v. Walter. Smith replied that in the opinion of the Government a Select Committee appointed, as was the custom, with reference to party politics, and on the recommendation of the party Whips, was a most improper tribunal to try charges of such gravity; but that he was willing to introduce a bill appointing a Commission, with full power to inquire into the allegations made against certain members of Parliament in the late trial. This bill, he declared, was offered for the acceptance of Mr Parnell and his colleagues, and that the Government were not disposed to press it if it should not be acceptable to the Irish party.

But when introducing the bill on July 16, Smith announced a significant change in the attitude of the Government, who, he said, were now resolved to proceed with it at all hazards. This brought the Cabinet under suspicion of having resolved to make political capital out of the charges against their opponents. Smith was taxed with having received a visit from Mr Walter of the 'Times' while the question was under consideration of the Cabinet, and frankly admitted that he had done so 66 as an old friend." Upon

A.D. 1888.] LORD R. CHURCHILL'S REMONSTRANCE.

311

this Sir William Harcourt roundly charged the Government with having acted in collusion with the Times'—a charge that received poignancy in the fact that the AttorneyGeneral, whose duty it was to give legal advice to the Government, had also been counsel for the 'Times' in the recent trial.

On the whole, the action of the Government in offering and then insisting upon the Commission had hearty approval from the Unionist party, and this feeling was strengthened when it was seen how anxiously the Irish Nationalist members strove to limit the scope of the inquiry. But there was at least one important exception to unanimity in the matter. Lord Randolph Churchill viewed intervention by the Government in the least favourable light, and conveyed to Smith his reasons in an ably drawn Memorandum, which he afterwards described as a "strong but friendly protest against the measure."

The Charges and Allegations Bill passed through both Houses, and the Commission met on October 17. "The proceedings," as a contemporary chronicler observes, "speedily assumed the appearance of a case in which the 'Times' appeared as plaintiff and the Irish members as defendants." But the presence of the Attorney-General as leading counsel for the Times,' and of Sir Charles Russell for the Irish members, gave the trial all the appearance of an impeachment or indictment of Mr Parnell and his colleagues by the Government. And unfortunately the popular impression prevailed that the existence of the Ministry depended on the charges being substantiated.

Parliament, which had been adjourned on August 13, was to meet again in November to finish up the work of the session. Speaking at the Mansion House on August 8, the Prime Minister alluded to this in that vein of irony in which he so much excels. "It is impossible," he said, "not

to feel that the wisdom of Parliament is great, and that the eloquence of Parliament is great; but the eloquence is getting in the way of the wisdom.”

Smith joined his wife at Aix-les-Bains, where she had gone for the benefit of her health, and he wrote thence in good spirits on September 1 to his daughter, Mrs A. Acland, with suggestions for the names to be given to her baby.

Wilhelmina Henrietta Frederica-quite lovely—but lovelier still if you add Beatricia Alfrida—Skeggs. My dear, I am glad your spirits are good, and I hope they will be better when you have received this brilliant suggestion for the names of the granddaughter. I am going deliberately to set to work to spoil and make her quite an anxiety to her Parents. There are all sorts of people here, but I am not much amused with them. Some of the Americans are astonishing. It is difficult to believe they are not large butterflies. Their colors are as brilliant, and some of the loose things they wear resemble wings, but they have feet and they have voices, which butterflies have not. Yesterday Lord Hartington came to see me, dressed as a seedy, shady sailor, but he sat down and talked politics for half an hour, and he said it was pleasant in a place like this to have some work to do.

On his return to England, Smith took a full share in those platform labours which the growing practice of these latter days has made more and more oppressive upon public men. In doing this he was acting against the advice of his doctors, and had also to overcome his own misgivings as to his oratorical power.

I have been sent [he writes to Mr Penrose Fitzgerald] by the Whips to Gloucester, and I am going for the same masters to Salford. This is all I can do before 6th Novr., and after that date I really do not know what I can do. My present impression is that I ought not to speak anywhere at all: old Jenner is very strong against it. I cannot believe that a speech of mine would help any fellow, but I would rather give you a lift up than any other man in the House.

Among Mr Smith's papers there has been preserved a cutting from the 'Birmingham Daily Post' of October 10,

1 Sir William Jenner, Bart., G. C.B., M.D.

A.D. 1888.]

END OF A LONG SESSION.

313

1888, commenting upon a discrepancy between the report of his speech at Gloucester given in the 'Times,' and those reports which appeared in other papers. The writer observed that no doubt "Mr Smith, according to custom, gave the manuscript of his address to the 'Times' representative beforehand, and was so affected by his feelings of gratitude to the Liberal Unionists as he went on that he added the sentence to which attention has been drawn." The sentence referred to was one in which he expressed his willingness to retire in favour of a Liberal Unionist leader, if that would strengthen the Unionist party, and the journalist went on to point out that this was only another illustration of the danger incurred by a political leader, when he not only writes his speech but hands it to the reporters in advance. The moral, however, was wasted in this instance, for Smith has written the following comment in red ink in the margin-" Amusing. I never wrote out a speech in

my life, and could not do it.-W. H. S.”

It was hoped when Parliament reassembled on November 6 that the business remaining over would be quickly got through, but the introduction of a bill to extend the purchase powers of Lord Ashbourne's Irish Land Act roused the ire of the Opposition, who prolonged the debates on Supply, in order to thwart the benevolent intentions of the Government towards Ireland. By Lord Ashbourne's Act, passed in 1885, five millions had been advanced for the purchase of their holdings by tenants. It had been a complete success of the £90,000 of instalments accruing for repayment on the sums advanced, only £1100 was in arrear. It was now proposed to increase the sum for buying out the Irish landlords from 5 to 10 millions. The fight over the bill was a hard one, and the prorogation was not achieved till Christmas Eve.

Smith's health had suffered so much from these pro

longed proceedings that on December 15 he was obliged to leave for the South of Europe, where he remained till February 4, 1889.

CHAPTER XXII.

1889.

That which distinguished Smith more than anything else among the common run of politicians was the constancy with which he kept in view the interests of the country and of that party by which he believed the country might best be served, to the absolute exclusion of his own career. The following correspondence is an example of this.

Private.

MARSEILLES, Feb. 3, 1889.

MY DEAR SALISBURY,-You referred a few days ago to the violence and unscrupulousness of the Opposition, and to their readiness to avail themselves of any weapon which they may find ready to their hands, no matter what the consequences may be.

The extension of the suffrage has brought us face to face with the most grave possibilities. It has made the extreme Radicals masters of the Liberal party, and men support a policy now from which they would have shrunk with horror ten years ago. There is also this strange peculiarity in the English mind to be taken into account. Men who are strictly honest in their transactions with their neighbours have come to regard Parliament as an instrument by which a transfer of rights and property may equitably be made from the few to the many; and there is yet another feature of the present day which is disgusting, and that is, that familiarity with crimes against property, or a class which is not their class, gradually deprives these crimes of the nature of crime in the eyes of the multitude, and even seems to create a sympathy for them.

To deal with public affairs with such an Opposition and in such a state of the public mind, the Government requires the judgment, resource, and eloquence of the strongest men that can be found in the House of Commons and in the country.

I do not think it possible to exaggerate the gravity of the struggle in which we are engaged, and I have never disguised from you my view that in such a fight it is really the duty of the chief to put those men in the most prominent position who are best fitted to do the work. I am much stronger for my holiday, but I am not more ready