A.D. 1870.] THE SMOKING-ROOM. 173 ton Cross1 and Lord Sandon, with whom Smith soon fell into close co-operation, and these three, with some associates, soon came to be looked on as the practical leaders of Opposition. It was no uncommon thing, when matters were moving sluggishly among the Conservatives, for Disraeli to give a hint to this little group that the fire wanted stirring. The proceedings which take place, with greater or less decorum, among the occupants of the dingy green benches in the Chamber itself, are, in a large degree, the outcome of much that goes on elsewhere, and there is no corner of Westminster Palace where projects spring so quickly into being and are nursed into maturity than in the smoking-room of the House of Commons. When James I., with royal profusion of adjectives, penned his 'Counter-blaste' against the "continuall vse of taking this vnsauorie smoake," asked, "What honour or policy can moove vs to imitate the barbarous and beastly maners of the wilde, godlesse and slauish Indians, especially in so vile and stinking a custome?" and wound up by denouncing it as "a custome loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmefulle to the braine, dangerous to the lungs, and in blacke stinking fume thereof neerest resembling the 1 Created Viscount Cross in 1886. horrible stigian smoake of the pit that is bottomlesse," he could not have foreseen what an important influence it was to have, not only on the revenue, but on the general direction of national policy. In 1870 there was but one smoking room for the use of members of the House of Commons (there are now three), an ill-lit, draughty, cheerless apartment opening upon the terrace, and this was the favourite resort of the most active spirits in all the political sections. Here, more than elsewhere, was the realm of frankness: men of the most divergent views chatted together and discussed the course of events-past, present, and to come; on this neutral field Cross, Sandon, and Smith used to spend much of their time. When Parliament reassembled in 1870, the condition of Ireland showed little to justify the expectation professed by the authors of the Irish Church Act as to the conciliatory effect it was to have on disaffected persons. On the contrary, the Fenian movement had become so formidable towards the close of 1869 that the Government had found it necessary to strengthen the force in Ireland by the addition of several battalions, agrarian crime increased at a frightful rate, and there seemed to be no limit to the violence of THE IRISH LAND BILL. 175 A.D. 1870.] seditious language uttered in the National press. Nevertheless, undaunted by the ill return shown for their efforts at conciliation, the Cabinet resolved to persevere further in that direction, and thereby justify, within a shorter time than could have been predicted, the forecast made by the Bishop of Peterborough, that, having despoiled the Church of her corporate property, they would direct their next attack against private property in land; for whatever opinion may be held as to the manner in which Irish landlords had exercised their rights and the spirit in which their estates had been administered, it cannot be questioned that the effect of the Land Bill introduced by the Government was to diminish very seriously the value of landed property in Ireland. The appearance of this Land Bill was a direct fulfilment of the eloquent Prelate's forecast. But the Conservative leaders could not be blind to the state of matters in Ireland: they could not fail to recognise that the rights and wrongs of private ownership in land had been confused by the tacit recognition in certain parts of Ireland of customs of tenure, utterly unknown in England and Scotland, and of the existence in the other provinces of precisely the same conditions which had led to the sanction of tenant-right in Ulster. They resolved, therefore, not to oppose the bill on second reading; but, by attacking the details of it in Committee, to purge it of the novel and obnoxious principles it contained. A division, it is true, was taken against the second reading, but it revealed the grotesque proportions of 442 votes to 11, and in the minority were only found two Conservatives, one of whom, Mr, now the Right Honourable, James Lowther, to this day maintains in Parliament a consistent and dogged resistance to almost every innovation. In Committee the first and principal conflict was joined upon the third clause, which provided compensation for disturbance, even in those parts of Ireland where tenant-right was not a recognised custom. To this clause Mr Disraeli moved an amendment limiting compensation to unexhausted improvements-in itself an important concession in a country where it was extremely rare for improvements to be undertaken by any one except the tenant. The debate on this clause was long and animated; the division was momentous, because it marked the first step in a long course of legislation based on the principle of dual ownership, and Mr Disraeli's amendment was defeated by 296 votes to 220. A.D. 1870.] COMPULSORY EDUCATION. 177 Although Smith took no active part in the debates on this important measure, it seems to have been at this time that his interest was drawn to the subject of it, and led to the exertions he devoted to it in after-years, and the share it will be shown that he had in the efforts made to relieve Irish landlords from the intolerable position in which they had been left, by equitably transferring property from the owner to the occupier. To the consideration of another bill, introduced by Mr W. E. Forster two days after the Irish Land Bill,- a measure not so startling as the other in its innovation upon recognised principles, but not of interest less complex nor results less far-reaching the Elementary Education Bill Smith was able to bring ripe experience as well as sympathetic assistance. ship with Forster, at that time Vice-President of the Committee of Council on Education (which is the cumbersome periphrasis prescribed by departmental etiquette as the title of our Minister of Education),1 probably began in numerous His friend 1 Time, it is said, was made for slaves, and the subjects of Queen Victoria, being nothing if not a free people, show a lofty contempt for economy in that commodity, especially, as is well known, in the House of Commons. Otherwise it might be interesting to calculate how many minutes are lost in debate by observance of the rule prohibiting one member alluding to another except by mentioning VOL. I. M |