FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110  
111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   >>   >|  
ntly be thus described. It extends to all legal proceedings in Ireland which (i) are instituted at the instance of or against the Treasury or Commissioners of Customs, or any of their officers, or (ii) relate to the election of members to serve in [the Imperial] Parliament, or (iii) touch any matter not within the powers of the Irish Legislature, or (iv) touch any matter affected by a law which the Irish Legislature have not power to repeal or alter. It is possible that sub-clause (4) gives the Exchequer Judges a much wider jurisdiction than is intended by the authors of the Home Rule Bill, and the strictures which have been made on this sub-clause deserve attention. My purpose, however, is not to criticise the details of the Home Rule Bill or to suggest amendments thereto. Its fundamental principle is, in the eyes of every Unionist, unsound, and the Bill itself therefore unamendable. My object is simply to describe and criticise the general constitutional provisions of the Bill and to show their bearing and effect. [82] Compare _England's Case_ (3rd ed.), pp. 258, 259. [83] See _England's Case_ (3rd ed.), pp. 214-218. [84] See Home Rule Bill, clause 3, sub-clause (7) (p. 198, _post_), and compare same clause slightly amended, in Bill, as sent up to the House of Lords, sub-clause (8). [85] These strictures on the financial arrangements which were to exist between England and Ireland apply directly to the Home Rule Bill as introduced into the House of Commons, but they are less applicable to the Bill as amended, more or less in favour of Ireland, before the Bill was sent up to the House of Lords. Compare clause 10 of the original Bill with clause 11 of the Bill as amended and brought up to the House of Lords. [86] Bill, clauses 14, 15, and 16. [Compare with these clauses of the original Bill clauses 13, 14, 15, and 16 of the Bill as amended before being sent to the House of Lords.] [87] See Fiske, _Critical Period of American History_, chs. iii. and iv. [88] See, _e.g._, letter of Mr. Clancy, M.P., on the Financial Clauses of the Home Rule Bill, _Manchester Guardian_, April 4, 1893. [89] Bill, clause 15. [90] See pp. 72 and 82, _ante_. [91] See pp. 79, 80, _ante_. [92] _Souvenirs de Alexis de Tocqueville_, p. 63. [93] The reader should note the history of the insurrection in Ticino during 1891. It is quite clear that the Liberals of Ticino
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110  
111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

clause

 

amended

 

clauses

 

England

 

Compare

 

Ireland

 

criticise

 
original
 

strictures

 

matter


Legislature

 

Ticino

 

arrangements

 

financial

 

brought

 

favour

 
Commons
 

introduced

 

applicable

 

directly


Alexis

 

Tocqueville

 

Souvenirs

 

reader

 

Liberals

 

insurrection

 
history
 

letter

 

History

 

Critical


Period

 

American

 

Clancy

 

Guardian

 

Manchester

 

Clauses

 

Financial

 

intended

 
authors
 

jurisdiction


Exchequer
 
Judges
 

instance

 
attention
 

purpose

 
deserve
 

instituted

 

Treasury

 

Imperial

 

Parliament