Chap. 5, "taceri citra culpam, multisque aliis remediis expiari possunt." Hence, whilst we may confess them with great advantage, yet there is simply no obligation, per se, of doing so. The Council insists that the Eucharist is remedy for past, antidote against future sins, and aliment of grace for our souls, whence the doctrine may be summed up for the comfort of timid souls, that no antecedens, foregoing, venial sin can hinder the effect of this Divine Sacrament. That by no accompanying, concomitans fault (in one free from mortal sin) is an increase of habitual grace impeded, but no increase of sensible devotion is promised at all, or probable, in such case. “Sumi autem voluit Sacramentum hoc, tanquam spiritualem animarum cibum, quo alantur et confortentur viventes vita Illius qui dixit: Qui manducat Me, et ipse vivet propter Me, et tanquam antidotum, quo liberemur a culpis quotidianis, et a peccatis mortalibus præservemur,'" Sess. xiii., Chap. 2.

The pious author finishes his work by stating that the whole object of it is chiefly to trace out the general method approved by the Church, through councils, doctors, and saints (whose testimony he produces), in the administration of the Sacraments of Penance and the Holy Eucharist. That these Sacraments must be I used for the cure of souls, and that youth should be specially fortified by frequent approach to these sources of grace. It follows, and is subsequently touched upon, that with those who are already accustomed as young people to come to them greater fruits of sanctity may be lawfully and surely expected, but that to advance in the path of virtue without the use of the Sacraments is truly “il voler passar per l'aer' senz'ali,"—an attempt to fly wingless.

TH

THE IRISH SITUATION.

HE object of the following pages is to lay before the readers of this REVIEW an impartial and accurate estimate—so far as the writer is able-of the forces and factors that are at work in the solution of the Irish question at the present hour. Naturally, if not logically, the first point of consideration will be the position of the Gladstone Cabinet, and the change which the new Rules of Procedure have effected in the parliamentary machine.

A month or so ago, there were even cautious political observers ready to declare that the satisfactory results of the Egyptian campaign had secured for the government a fund of popular favor that could be drawn freely upon for a considerable period to come, and the phrase was common, even among habitual detractors of Mr. Gladstone, that he held the Premiership for life. These prophecies were made on the morrow of a victory in the field, and were naturally suffused with the glow of such an event. Popular enthusiasm with regard to the war has considerably cooled down since then. By the inevitable law of reaction, the English people have grown probably a little shamefaced over their rather disproportional selfgratulation on the defeat of a contemptible foe; and the government have still before them the enormously difficult problem of making a permanent and satisfactory settlement as to the future of Egypt. It will be necessary to make all these abatements in considering the effect of the Egyptian enterprise on the political fortunes of the government, and the final result may be to leave them just a decent balance of reputation-the record of not having done very ill, and not having done very well. Nor would it be safe to predict that, if an immediate appeal were made to the English constituencies, the result would be the return of even as large a majority as that which the Liberal party enjoys in the present House of Commons. No theme has afforded English writers a subject of more frequent self-laudation than the favorable contrast between the stability of English institutions and opinion, and the incalculable instability and fickleness of institutions operating in other lands. The institutions of England are stable; but, there is scarcely any country in the world where political opinion is subject to more sudden and more violent and unaccountable transformations. When Mr. Gladstone was Prime Minister before, his administration was free from any of the disastrous features of his second tenure of office; in the course of five years he framed measures which abolished Protestant ascendency in Ireland, gave, or was intended to give, the first shake to the absolute power of the rich landlord, de

stroyed by the ballot territorial and capitalist intimidation in England and Scotland as well as Ireland, put an end to the shameful corruption of purchase in the army, and conferred on the English people their first Education Act; and yet, when, apparently in the plenitude and almost the wantonness of his power, he appealed for a renewal of his mandate to the English constituencies, the English constituencies responded by casting him into impotence, and elevating a cynic, selfish and unbelieving Jew to a position of almost unequalled power. It is, therefore, impossible to predict what is the opinion of the constituencies with regard to the government, and yet it is safe to assume that its position at the present moment is very strong, and has all the superficial signs of durability.

A powerful majority in Parliament is not always a guarantee of the retention of office by a Liberal minister; there are inevitable differences of opinion between the different sections of the Liberal party which exercise a constantly disintegrating force, and under the senseless system by which a hereditary chamber of landowners is clothed with constitutional power equal to that of the chamber elected by popular suffrage, the leader of the Conservative party in the House of Peers has it always within his right to provoke a constitutional crisis. But Mr. Gladstone at the present moment seems quite free from either of these two dangers. Taking the latter peril first, the House of Lords has the characteristic timidity of hereditary chambers,-in the present year, for instance, it repudiated the leadership of the Marquis of Salisbury and swallowed the Arrears Bill, and the House of Lords rarely exercises its veto on legislation, unless at the same time the minister is weak in the House of Commons and is but feebly backed by the country. And finally, there is this excellent reason for regarding the danger to the ministry from the House of Lords as at the moment infinitesimal: Mr. Gladstone and his colleagues have made up their minds not to be expelled from office by any vote of the House of Lords until the collision comes upon some popular measure, such as the reduction of the franchise in the English counties, which will supply the Liberal party with a splendid grievance and a catching cry. The country, then, being, so far as is known, friendly to the government, and the danger from the House of Lords being small, the key to the situation is the position of the government in the third factor of this triangular problem,-that is to say, in the House of Commons.

On this point, it is easier to use the language of exaggeration than of moderation; for, assuredly, it has rarely fallen to the lot of any man to occupy a place of such commanding authority in any popular assembly as that which is now enjoyed by Mr. Glad

stone in the House of Commons. This is not the place to enter into a discussion of the mental or moral character of the present Prime Minister of England; it must suffice to say that, in many respects, he is, perhaps, the greatest parliamentarian the English House of Commons has ever produced. He has full command of nearly all the resources of the orator,—passion, forcible exposition of argument, lucidity of statement,—even, occasionally, effective playfulness; and the resources of his power of reply-sometimes just, and very often sophistical-even practically unlimited. He has, besides, the ideal parliamentary temper, for, though he is not supposed to be a good proof of ardor in the individual, he has a power of gathering in the feelings of the crowd around him with a rapidity that amounts to an instinct, and a nature thus readily impressionable and sympathetic enables him to accommodate his mood to that of the very moment as faithfully as the actor of genius expresses the changing temper of a Shakesperian character. It has often been remarked that a deaf man could give some fair guess as to what was going on in the House of Commons, if he could only see and closely observe the face of Mr. Gladstone,-which reflects as faithfully as the mirror, and is as changeable as the sea under the alternate sunshine and cloud of an April sky. All these great natural gifts have been cultivated to the highest point. Mr. Gladstone's knowledge is vast, his memory marvellously retentive, and he has a political and parliamentary experience that reached, on a day in the month of December, the term of fifty years. And, finally, the gifts of mind, fitness of disposition, and acquirements are set off by those physical advantages which form so large a part in the effectiveness of an orator,—a splendid face, a fine figure, and a voice that, though slightly enfeebled, is still melodious, expressive, and powerful.

Mr. Gladstone's own colleagues are said to dislike him, and, as he practically monopolizes all the talk and all the work, and stands out in relief so bold as to dwarf all surrounding men, this is intelligible. But they, at the same time, know that it is he who has the hold over Parliament, and, still more, that he is the centre of popular attention, and the target-so to speak-of popular affection and enthusiasm; and thus they obey and flatter him, and even Sir William Harcourt, who, at one time, dreamed of being a possible rival, and who passes still for being the most venomous among the whole Ministry in his hate to his chief, even Sir William Harcourt is compelled, whenever he speaks, to pour fulsome eulogies on Mr. Gladstone's head. It is the same thing, but, of course, in an exaggerated form, with the rank and file of the Prime Minister's followers. The full and swelling tide of popular enthusiasm, which floated the Liberal party into power in 1880, was the creation of

Gladstone, and of Gladstone alone; Gladstone supplied the popular cry and the magnetic name; and all the electioneering wirepuller, therefore, required, in the selection of candidates at the last General election, was a sufficiency of means,-for election contests continue to be very expensive in England,—and an orthodox faith in the goodness of Mr. Gladstone, and the wickedness of Lord Beaconsfield, the Tories, and the Turks. Nameless men were thus, in the vast majority of cases, returned for the English constituencies; the few intelligent men among the crowd,-owing to the absorption of the time of Parliament in fighting Irish obstruction or passing Irish measures of relief,—have not had any opportunity of distinguishing themselves, and nine out of ten of the entire Liberal members remain with but shadowy names to the constituencies; they knew of Mr. Gladstone, and Mr. Gladstone alone, and even a slight difference from the views of the Prime Minister,—a vote against him on an immaterial point, a feeble or brief protest against any of his remarks,-in one notable case, the mere fact of frequent speaking to the slight interruption of the Premier's plans,—any one of these trifles is sufficient to bring down on the unfortunate member a sharp protest from his constituents.

mose.

Finally, the position of Mr. Gladstone is rendered stronger by the contemptible impotency of his opponents. Sir Stafford Northcote's hopeless feebleness has procured for him the unflattering nickname of the "grand old woman." Mr. Gladstone is called by the comic journals, and in the deshabille of private conversation, the "grand old man." Lord John Manners is consistently lachrySir Richard Cross, pettifogging. Mr. Plunkett and Mr. Gibson-the two Irishmen who do a little to relieve the general dulness of the front Opposition bench-are unequal to the situation of leadership; the one, from incurable laziness and constitutional unreadiness; the other, because, though his tongue is fatally fertile in words, his mind is essentially narrow and bigoted. I do not wish to be flippant or irreverent; but the sight of the front Opposition bench, in the House of Commons, always recalls to my mind the row of feeble and frowsy old ladies whom one sees sparsely scattered on the evenings of a week-day in the little Bethel of one of the obscure ranting preachers of London. To sum up: what with his own great powers, the loyalty of his friends, and the feebleness of his foes, Mr. Gladstone, to-day, is supreme in Parliament; the unchecked dictator, rather than the constitutional leader of that assembly.

We have now arrived at a just estimate of one of the principal factors in the problem we are considering; we have reached the conclusion that the position of Mr. Gladstone-that is to say, of the present administration-has all the outward evidence of great