William Ewart Gladstone
William Ewart Gladstone led the Liberal party and served as Prime Minister four times throughout the nineteenth century. He decided to tackle the issue of Irish Home Rule due to his moral convictions, and for political gain.
Throughout the nineteenth century Gladstone had made it his burden to placate the Irish. He recognized the oppressive rule of the British, and worked to resolve the conflict with the Irish. His government disestablished the Church of Ireland in 1869 [1], and also began the process of Irish land reform with the conservative Land Act of 1870 [2]. He concluded that the Act of Union of 1800 had been passed on a fraudulent basis which prompted him to rectify the situation [3]. Gladstone came to the conclusion that some form of Irish self-government was necessary to please the Irish.
In April 1882, Gladstone wrote a letter to Chief Secretary for Ireland, William Forster. In it he proposed that local Irish governments needed to be implemented in order to bring about peace in Ireland, because any laws imposed by the British would not satisfy the Irish.
"If we say we must postpone the question till the state of the country is more fit for it, I should answer that the least danger is in going forward at once. It is liberty alone which fits men for liberty. This proposition, like every other in politics, has its bounds; but it is far safer than the counter doctrine, wait till they are fit… [The next step regarding Ireland] is to relieve Great Britain from the enormous weight of the government of Ireland unaided by the people, and from the hopeless contradiction in which we stand while we give a parliamentary representation, hardly effective for anything but mischief without the local institutions of self-government which it presupposes and on which alone it can have a sound and healthy basis [4]."
In 1882, Gladstone’s views on Home Rule were not fully defined, nor were they knowledge to the electorate. Gladstone believed that Home Rule, no matter how radical or progressive it seemed, was the only means of avoiding a catastrophe between Ireland and Britain [5].
In 1885 Gladstone’s son Herbert announced that Gladstone believed Irish Home rule to be a necessary solution to the Irish Question. This instance became known as the Hawarden Kite, and it placed the burden of advocating for Irish self-government solely on the shoulders of the Liberal Party [6]. The Tories, who had been discussing Home Rule with Parnell, dropped the unpleasant issue like a hot potato, and conceded the Government to Gladstone and the Liberals [7]. The main objective of Gladstone’s new government was to bring Home Rule to Ireland. This reformed the alliance between the Irish Nationalists and the British Liberals in the House of Commons. The Irish Parliamentary Party which had been using their votes to lobby for their cause of Home Rule, returned their allegiance to the Liberal Party. "Gladstone's conversion to Home Rule can be understood, first, as a pre-emptive ploy to force the Conservatives to come clean on their Irish policy and, second, and more important, as an attempt to reinvigorate his party with moral purpose and thus stave of the evil day of Tory electoral triumph. Naked political advantage lay behind Gladstone's Adoption of Home Rule; but God had whispered in his ear that it was the right thing to do [8]."
Gladstone’s 1886 Home Rule Bill proved to be too progressive for the majority of the House of Commons. It called for dissolution of the present Irish parliamentary representation at Westminster and gave Ireland its own parliament that decided the whole of Irish affairs [9]. Many feared that this provision in the Bill would break up the imperial unity of Great Britain between the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland. Gladstone did not seem to see the situation in the same light as he stated in his speech presenting the Bill, “To speak, in connection with any meditated or possible plan, of the dismemberment of the Empire or the disintegration of the Empire is, in the face of the history of the eighteenth century, not merely a misnomer, but and absurdity [10]." Gladstone hoped that somehow imperial unity would remain intact between the three kingdoms based on the “footing of those free institutions to which Englishmen, Scotchmen and Irishmen are alike unalterably attached [11]." The idealistic view of future relations between the kingdoms that Gladstone proposed was too much for the House of Commons to wrap their heads around. It seemed utterly impractical, as it would drive a wedge between England and Ireland. Despite Gladstone’s best efforts to argue against that notion, on June 8th after two months of debating and deliberation, the first Home Rule Bill was rejected by 343 votes to 313 [12].
After the defeat of the first Home Rule Bill, Gladstone lost control of the government but eventually regained the Prime Ministry for his fourth and final time in 1892. In his second attempt to enact Home Rule for Ireland, the main point of contingency from the first Home Rule Bill, ridding Westminster of the Irish M.P.s, was dismissed. Gladstone agreed that Irish M.P.s were to remain at Westminster under the condition that they were not to vote on distinctly English or Scottish Bills. There were debates and minor squabblings over the particulars of the Bill, but in its third reading in 1893, Gladstone’s Home Rule Bill carried through the House of Commons by a margin of 34 votes [13]. The Bill then passed on to the House of Lords where it was overwhelmingly dismissed by a vote of 419 to 41 [14]. The House of Lords was comprised of predominantly conservatives as the vote on the Bill clearly shows. Gladstone wanted to bring the veto power of the House of Lords into question, but the majority of his Party decided against this course of action and he was forced to resign as Prime Minister.[15] Before his resignation, Gladstone in a speech regarding the amendments made to a bill in the House of Lords questioned the very nature of the House of Lords when he stated:
"The question is whether the work of the House of Lords is not merely to modify, but to annihilate the whole work of the House of Commons, work which has been performed at an amount of sacrifice-of time, of labor, of convenience, and perhaps of health- but at any rate an amount of sacrifice totally unknown to the House of Lords? Well Sir, we have not been anxious-I believe I speak for my colleagues, I know I speak my own convictions- we… have been desirous to save something from the wreck of the session’s work [16]."
This sentiment would eventually lead to the Parliament Act of 1911, which limited the veto power of the House of Lords [17]. In Gladstone’s lifetime however, Home Rule amounted to nothing more than a political ideal.
Throughout the nineteenth century Gladstone had made it his burden to placate the Irish. He recognized the oppressive rule of the British, and worked to resolve the conflict with the Irish. His government disestablished the Church of Ireland in 1869 [1], and also began the process of Irish land reform with the conservative Land Act of 1870 [2]. He concluded that the Act of Union of 1800 had been passed on a fraudulent basis which prompted him to rectify the situation [3]. Gladstone came to the conclusion that some form of Irish self-government was necessary to please the Irish.
In April 1882, Gladstone wrote a letter to Chief Secretary for Ireland, William Forster. In it he proposed that local Irish governments needed to be implemented in order to bring about peace in Ireland, because any laws imposed by the British would not satisfy the Irish.
"If we say we must postpone the question till the state of the country is more fit for it, I should answer that the least danger is in going forward at once. It is liberty alone which fits men for liberty. This proposition, like every other in politics, has its bounds; but it is far safer than the counter doctrine, wait till they are fit… [The next step regarding Ireland] is to relieve Great Britain from the enormous weight of the government of Ireland unaided by the people, and from the hopeless contradiction in which we stand while we give a parliamentary representation, hardly effective for anything but mischief without the local institutions of self-government which it presupposes and on which alone it can have a sound and healthy basis [4]."
In 1882, Gladstone’s views on Home Rule were not fully defined, nor were they knowledge to the electorate. Gladstone believed that Home Rule, no matter how radical or progressive it seemed, was the only means of avoiding a catastrophe between Ireland and Britain [5].
In 1885 Gladstone’s son Herbert announced that Gladstone believed Irish Home rule to be a necessary solution to the Irish Question. This instance became known as the Hawarden Kite, and it placed the burden of advocating for Irish self-government solely on the shoulders of the Liberal Party [6]. The Tories, who had been discussing Home Rule with Parnell, dropped the unpleasant issue like a hot potato, and conceded the Government to Gladstone and the Liberals [7]. The main objective of Gladstone’s new government was to bring Home Rule to Ireland. This reformed the alliance between the Irish Nationalists and the British Liberals in the House of Commons. The Irish Parliamentary Party which had been using their votes to lobby for their cause of Home Rule, returned their allegiance to the Liberal Party. "Gladstone's conversion to Home Rule can be understood, first, as a pre-emptive ploy to force the Conservatives to come clean on their Irish policy and, second, and more important, as an attempt to reinvigorate his party with moral purpose and thus stave of the evil day of Tory electoral triumph. Naked political advantage lay behind Gladstone's Adoption of Home Rule; but God had whispered in his ear that it was the right thing to do [8]."
Gladstone’s 1886 Home Rule Bill proved to be too progressive for the majority of the House of Commons. It called for dissolution of the present Irish parliamentary representation at Westminster and gave Ireland its own parliament that decided the whole of Irish affairs [9]. Many feared that this provision in the Bill would break up the imperial unity of Great Britain between the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland. Gladstone did not seem to see the situation in the same light as he stated in his speech presenting the Bill, “To speak, in connection with any meditated or possible plan, of the dismemberment of the Empire or the disintegration of the Empire is, in the face of the history of the eighteenth century, not merely a misnomer, but and absurdity [10]." Gladstone hoped that somehow imperial unity would remain intact between the three kingdoms based on the “footing of those free institutions to which Englishmen, Scotchmen and Irishmen are alike unalterably attached [11]." The idealistic view of future relations between the kingdoms that Gladstone proposed was too much for the House of Commons to wrap their heads around. It seemed utterly impractical, as it would drive a wedge between England and Ireland. Despite Gladstone’s best efforts to argue against that notion, on June 8th after two months of debating and deliberation, the first Home Rule Bill was rejected by 343 votes to 313 [12].
After the defeat of the first Home Rule Bill, Gladstone lost control of the government but eventually regained the Prime Ministry for his fourth and final time in 1892. In his second attempt to enact Home Rule for Ireland, the main point of contingency from the first Home Rule Bill, ridding Westminster of the Irish M.P.s, was dismissed. Gladstone agreed that Irish M.P.s were to remain at Westminster under the condition that they were not to vote on distinctly English or Scottish Bills. There were debates and minor squabblings over the particulars of the Bill, but in its third reading in 1893, Gladstone’s Home Rule Bill carried through the House of Commons by a margin of 34 votes [13]. The Bill then passed on to the House of Lords where it was overwhelmingly dismissed by a vote of 419 to 41 [14]. The House of Lords was comprised of predominantly conservatives as the vote on the Bill clearly shows. Gladstone wanted to bring the veto power of the House of Lords into question, but the majority of his Party decided against this course of action and he was forced to resign as Prime Minister.[15] Before his resignation, Gladstone in a speech regarding the amendments made to a bill in the House of Lords questioned the very nature of the House of Lords when he stated:
"The question is whether the work of the House of Lords is not merely to modify, but to annihilate the whole work of the House of Commons, work which has been performed at an amount of sacrifice-of time, of labor, of convenience, and perhaps of health- but at any rate an amount of sacrifice totally unknown to the House of Lords? Well Sir, we have not been anxious-I believe I speak for my colleagues, I know I speak my own convictions- we… have been desirous to save something from the wreck of the session’s work [16]."
This sentiment would eventually lead to the Parliament Act of 1911, which limited the veto power of the House of Lords [17]. In Gladstone’s lifetime however, Home Rule amounted to nothing more than a political ideal.
[1] Peter Stansky, Gladstone, A Progress in Politics, Boston, Toronto: Little Brown & Company Limited. 1979, 114.
[2] Lawrence J. McCaffrey, The Irish Question: 1800-1922, Lexington, Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press, 1968, 86.
[3] Thomas Bartlett, Ireland: A History, New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. 2010, 323
[4] William E. Gladstone, John Morely, The Life of William Ewart Gladstone Vol. II, New York, New York: The MacMillian Company, 1911, 58.
[5] Patrick O'Farrell, England and Ireland Since 1800, London, England: Oxford University Press, 1975, 90
[6] Stansky, 118.
[7] Ibid., 157.
[8] Bartlett, 333-334
[9] Gladstone's Home Rule Bill. " Chicago Daily Tribune, May 3, 1886, 4.
[10] William Ewart Gladstone, The Speeches of the Right Hon. W.E. Gladstone on Home Rule, Criminal Law, Welsh and Irish Nationality, National Debt, and the Queens Reign, Edited by A. W. Hutton and H. J. Cohen, London, England: Methuen and Company, 1902, 14-15.
[11] Stansky, 161.
[12] David W. Bebbington, William Ewart Gladstone: Faith & Politics in Victorian Britain, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993, 215
[13] Ibid., 220-221.
[14] Ibid., 221.
[15] McCaffrey, 123.
[16] Stansky, 173.
[17] Ibid., 173.
*Image is from Wikimedia Commons in Public Domain
[2] Lawrence J. McCaffrey, The Irish Question: 1800-1922, Lexington, Kentucky: University of Kentucky Press, 1968, 86.
[3] Thomas Bartlett, Ireland: A History, New York, New York: Cambridge University Press. 2010, 323
[4] William E. Gladstone, John Morely, The Life of William Ewart Gladstone Vol. II, New York, New York: The MacMillian Company, 1911, 58.
[5] Patrick O'Farrell, England and Ireland Since 1800, London, England: Oxford University Press, 1975, 90
[6] Stansky, 118.
[7] Ibid., 157.
[8] Bartlett, 333-334
[9] Gladstone's Home Rule Bill. " Chicago Daily Tribune, May 3, 1886, 4.
[10] William Ewart Gladstone, The Speeches of the Right Hon. W.E. Gladstone on Home Rule, Criminal Law, Welsh and Irish Nationality, National Debt, and the Queens Reign, Edited by A. W. Hutton and H. J. Cohen, London, England: Methuen and Company, 1902, 14-15.
[11] Stansky, 161.
[12] David W. Bebbington, William Ewart Gladstone: Faith & Politics in Victorian Britain, Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1993, 215
[13] Ibid., 220-221.
[14] Ibid., 221.
[15] McCaffrey, 123.
[16] Stansky, 173.
[17] Ibid., 173.
*Image is from Wikimedia Commons in Public Domain