"DAD," said Phil the next morning, as they were walking down-stairs to breakfast. Dad, I am going to tell you a secret." "Bless me, Phil," exclaimed Sir Edward, as he settled his glasses on his nose. "But you've chosen a very inopportune moment. We will arrive at the breakfast-room door in a moment." "I always make my strokes in a hurry." "Very well," sighed his father. "Say on, only make short work of it." "Dad," said Phil, taking his father's arm affectionately, "I want to marry. Constance. How is it to be done? To say Sir Edward was astonished is to give a feeble estimate of his state of mind. His small round eyes stared at Phil in the most absolute amazement; and the same feeling deprived him of his usual fluency of speech. He gasped and sputtered; had it been any one else who had presumed to tell him such a thing, he would have been furious; as it was only Phil who had been so audacious he only gnashed his teeth and looked unutterable things. Phil patted his arm good-humoredly. "I know, dad, I know," he murmured encouragingly, "I thought it would be a bit of a bother, at first. You will be reconciled to the idea after a time. How is it to be managed?" When Sir Edward recovered his speech, he felt strongly tempted to rage. But by degrees it dawned upon him that that would not be the right course to adopt with Phil. It never had been. He tried another plan. "Will you be so good as to tell me," he asked gravely, "what are your prospects in the near future?" Phil laughed. "I have none," he replied, after his mirth had spent itself. "Then-have some — that is all. When you have come and talk to me. Before that it is impudence to dream of dragging a girl down to poverty; that's all, Phil. There's my advice; I make you a present of it." For once Phil looked grave. "Thank you, sir," he said quietly. will think it over." 66 Ay, do," said Sir Edward, glad that the discussion was over. In reality it was just beginning, but Sir Edward did not know that.. The two men turned in at the open door, and Phil busied himself in pouring out tea. None of the ladies were down yet. Sir Edward liked these little ministrations on the part of his tall son; they flattered him, and he was glad to feel that Phil liked them too. By degrees he began to feel more kindly towards the young man. Phil," he said, as he buttoned up his driving-coat and put on his gloves. "I will tell you what I will do for you. I will watch you. If you make an effort to help yourself, I will help you. There, I'll say no more. A nod is as good as a wink, you know." "Thank you, sir," Phil replied as before. "I will think it over." He watched his father drive away, and lighting a cigar, he walked slowly away to the river. "I'll think it all over to-day, and decide. Dear little girl! I must make myself more of a man for her sake." He reached the river, and strolled along as far as the mill. It was very quiet and peaceful, and the air was fresh and bright. "I don't want to go abroad again," he said. "I think I'll try the same dodge over here. There's Brook's farm standing empty. Suppose I have a shy at that, and see what I can make of it. Why shouldn't a man farm in England on the same lines as he would abroad? He might make it pay. I've a very good mind to try." Then a sharp cry came on the wind to his ears-once- twice Phil flung away his cigar. "Some one in trouble," he exclaimed, as he answered with a shout. "I'm with you," he called aloud as he ran down to the water's edge. "Where are you?" He caught sight of a head rising on the surface of the water- - a child's head. Phil knew it. He remembered the youngster, it was the miller's little daughter. Has tily flinging off his coat, he sprang in after her, and caught her hair. "Keep still, Elsie, I've got you," he called out, for the child, in her terror, had flung her arms tightly round him, dragging | thinks of Phil, she him under. And the curlews cried overhead, in the clear air, as they circled above the water. And the tall trees bent down to sigh, their leafless branches touching the shining river. And the weeds flung their long stems high into the wind, while they waved to and fro, like spectral sentinels upon a lonely strand. But never a word, or a sign did they make to show that Philip Monkton slept beneath. Alas, poor Phil! Constance is Lady Monkton now. She I married Sir Edward after all. She is not unhappy, but now and then, when she (6 says: darling, which were yousaint or fool?" There is no need to wonder - I know. Don't you? MARY S. HANCOCK. From The Nineteenth Century. THE VERDICT OF ENGLAND. "ROMA LOCUTA EST." If my somewhat hazy and remote classical recollections serve me aright, the meaning of this phrase was that when the populus Romanus had given its decision there was no more to be said. It is so, at any rate, with us. The constituencies have spoken, and there is an end of the matter. I have no intention, therefore, of entering into elaborate arguments to show that the result of our appeal to the electorate of the United Kingdom, ought by rights to have been other than it has been. It is with the future, not with the past, that I am concerned; and I have no desire to fight over again the battle that we Unionists have fought and lost. But in order to point out what I conceive to be the duty and the interest of the Unionist party in the time to come, it is essential first of all to explain what in my judgment the verdict of the constituencies means, and still more what it does not mean. To put the issue shortly, the elections show that the majority of our electorate, as at present constituted, prefer Mr. Glad stone to Lord Salisbury. To me individually this popular admiration for the elect of Midlothian is a thing utterly unintelligible. Hero-worship of any kind is perhaps not much in my line, but if I am to worship a hero he must possess other and higher qualities than an exuberant verbosity, a masterdom of Parliamentary tactics, and an exaggerated belief in his own infallibility. Still, there is no arguing about tastes, and if the majority of my fellow-countrymen choose to look on Mr. Gladstone as a profound thinker, a great statesman, and a heaven-born minister, they have the same right to their opinion as I have to mine. The will of the country has declared in favor of Mr. Gladstone, and I, for one, speaking as an Englishman, can only hope the verdict of posterity may decide that the popular judgment was in the right, and that I and my fellow-Unionists were in the wrong. All I contend is that the elections turned, in as far as Great Britain is concerned, upon Mr. Gladstone's personality, and not upon the merits or demerits of Home Rule. It is a signal tribute to Mr. Gladstone's hold on the masses that he should have been able to carry the day in spite of his advocating a policy which a large section of his followers view with distrust and dislike, and which the great majority regard with supreme indifference. No other English politician could have obtained a hearing for Home Rule. If the repeal of the Union is now brought within a measurable distance of accomplishment, Mr. Gladstone may fairly say "Alone I did it." Prince Bismarck, whatever his detractors may say against him nowadays, will live forever in history as the statesman who united Germany into one nation. Mr. Gladstone, if successful in his Home Rule policy, will live in history as the statesman who disunited Great Britain and Ireland. Both statesmen are anxious for fame; but the latter seems to me to forget that, as Lord Macaulay said, there is a fame which is marvellously like infamy. Be this as it may, it is a mere abuse of language to say that the constituencies putting Ireland aside - have declared for Home Rule. The utmost that can truly be said is that they have signified their readiness to accept Home Rule, if its acceptance is the necessary price of the Liberals being replaced in office. In so doing the Liberal constituencies have faithfully followed the example of their illustrious leader. Mr. Gladstone attained the mature age of seventy-seven without being converted to Home Rule. But after the elections of 1885 he perceived that the growing strength of the Conservative reaction in England rendered it impossible for the Liberals to retain power unless they came to terms with the Nationalists. Sooner than sacrifice the supremacy of his party he agreed to repeal the Union. In 1892 the English Liberals have declared their readiness to do what Mr. Gladstone did six years ago. The master, however, has proved more apt than his pupils. With his unrivalled faculty of self-deception he has contrived to persuade himself that Home Rule is not only a political necessity, but an absolute benefit; and he has made the discovery that in bartering the repeal of the Union for the votes necessary to enable him to return to office, he is discharging a sacred duty which England owes to Ireland. His supporters, however, with rare exceptions, are unequal to this flight of fancy, and make no secret of the fact that they would never have dreamed of repealing the Union if it were not that its repeal has proved essential to their own party interests. were The second feature of the late elections to which I would call attention, is that the choice of England - as I predicted would be the case in the article I wrote last month under the above heading - has gone dead against Mr. Gladstone's policy. In London the Unionists held thirty-seven seats against twenty-five; in the English provincial boroughs, ninety-five against sixty-eight; in the English counties, one hundred and thirty-one against one hundred and three; while in the English universities, the whole five seats retained by the Unionists without even the pretence of a contest. Thus in England alone Lord Salisbury had a majority of seventy-two. In weighing the value of this majority you have to consider its quality as well as its quantity. London and the whole network of towns and counties which surround the metropolis have given an overwhelming vote against Home Rule. The Midland counties, the great centres of industrial enterprise, such as Liverpool, Manchester, and Birmingham, have remained faithful to the cause represented by Lord Salisbury's government. On the other hand, the gains of the Gladstonians have been chiefly made in the East End of London and in the poorer agricultural counties. It follows, therefore, that the wealth, the intelligence, the energy of England are mainly represented by the districts which have returned Unionist candidates; the districts, I may add, which, whenever we have one vote one value, must gain largely in electoral representation at the cost of the less pros. perous and populous constituencies in which the Separatists have made their chief gains. The third point worth noting is that the Unionists have gained ground in Scotland and Ireland, though not to such an extent as to compensate for their losses in the English counties. The fourth and last item which should be placed to the credit of the Unionists in any fair balance-sheet of the elections is the extent to which the Liberal Unionists have held their own. They lost in round numbers one quarter of the seats they held the other day, their respective strength in the late and the present Parliament being sixty as against forty-six. The loss is a serious one, but it falls far short of the total annihilation so confidently predicted for the Liberal Unionists by the Gladstonian organs. Indeed, it must fairly be owned that Liberal Unionism seems to be an advancing not a declining force in the great Midland districts, in which Mr. Chamberlain's personal supremacy is now found to be stronger than ever. before their prayers are granted by the arbiters of their fate. It is said that if you only eat dirt enough you learn to like the diet, and I should fancy that the politTaking the above considerations into ical stomachs of Sir William Harcourt and account, we can see that in the new Parlia- his like were exceptionally capable of asment there will be one of the most power- similating any sort of food, however repulful oppositions our political annals have sive to the ordinary palate. I can see, on record an opposition harmonious, therefore, little reason to imagine that the united, proud of its cause, hopeful of its negotiations I have referred to will fall future, confident of success. On the through owing to any excessive squeamother hand, we shall have a ministry sup-ishness on the part of Mr. Gladstone and ported by a heterogeneous and discordant his colleagues. The only possibility of majority, distracted by dissentient interests and conflicting claims, and with little heart in the cause which they are pledged to support. Indeed, my chief fear for the future lies in the fact that any calm calculation of results tells strongly on the Unionist side, and that in consequence there is a risk of our under-estimating the possible dangers of the position. the Liberals and Nationalists failing to come to an understanding lies in the off chance that the latter may insist upon conditions which the former could not accept without forfeiting the confidence of their party. But I doubt greatly this possibility being realized. Naturally enough, the Irish Nationalists, whether Parnellites or Anti-Parnellites, do not like the English Liberals; still more naturally they do not trust Mr. Gladstone, and most naturally of all they enjoy the humiliation which they have now the opportunity of inflicting on their old enemies. But I question their dislike and distrust of Mr. Gladstone, or their wish to pay off old scores, leading them to the length of declining to vote in favor of his return to office. The leaders of the Irish party are far too acute not to be aware that the Liberal gains in England were won mainly by Mr. Gladstone's personal popularity, not by any enthusiasm for Home Rule; they know, too, that Mr. Gladstone is the only English statesman who has either the power or the wish to carry Home Rule into effect, and that therefore they are running a serious risk, at his advanced period of life, in deferring even for a few months his accession to office. If Mr. Parnell had been alive the case might have been different. Whatever his fail For my own part I am not so satisfied, as most of my friends profess to be, of the practical impossibility of Mr. Gladstone's success inflicting any serious injury on the cause of the Union. After all, a majority is a majority, no matter how it may be composed; and I see little probability that the present majority will fail to exercise the first right of a majority, that of getting into office. The Nationalists undoubtedly are masters of the situation. Lord Salisbury has avowed, and rightly avowed, his intention of not resigning till he is defeated by a vote in the House of Commons. When Parliament meets -as it will within a day or two of these lines appearing in print some resolution professing want of confidence in her Maj. esty's ministry will have to be carried if Mr. Gladstone is to be entrusted with the formation of a government. The fate of this resolution will depend absolutely and entirely on the decision of the Nationalists. If they agree to vote for it, the res-ings, he was a born leader of men olution will be carried; if they decide not bold, determined, and unscrupulous gamto vote at all the resolution will be lost, and bler in the game of politics. The opporthe present ministry will remain in office, tunity presented by the inability of Mr. at any rate until next February. In all like- Gladstone to unseat the ministry and get lihood negotiations have already been en- back to office without the Nationalist vote tered into between the Liberal leaders and was one on which Mr. Parnell — to use a the Nationalists as to the terms on which metaphor familiar to card-players-would the latter will consent to give the vote re-infallibly "have gone nap.' The chance quired to enable Mr. Gladstone to get had come for which, in his own words, back to office. Beggars cannot be choos-"he had taken off his shirt," and I err ers, and the English politicians who greatly in my opinion of Mr. Parnell, both with Mr. Gladstone as their chief are for good or bad, if he would have connow begging, cap in hand, for the votes of sented to give his vote, or allow his the Sextons and the Healys, in order to followers to vote, so as to turn out the sit once more upon the Treasury bench, government, till he had obtained a formal will have, in Oriental phrase, to eat dirt undertaking from Mr. Gladstone pledging a himself and his party to pass such a Home | ecclesiasticism and a want of sympathy Rule Bill as would have practically con- with the ideas which form the fundamental ferred absolute legislative and executive basis of Protestantism. Nor can I place autonomy upon Ireland. The situation, much reliance on the strength of the Nonhowever, has been completely changed by conformist conscience. If Scotch Free the ostracism and subsequent death of the Kirkmen and the English Dissenters, who great Irish leader. Mr. McCarthy is not form the backbone of the Liberal party in Parnell, and, what is more, knows he is Scotland and in the English provincial not Parnell; and a like assertion might be boroughs, are indifferent to the protests of made with regard to every one of the Irish their co-religionists in Ulster, why should patriots from Dillon and O'Brien down to we expect them to sacrifice their hostility Redmond and Tanner. With Parnell to the Church of England in order to hinalive the Nationalists would not have der the Church of Rome from gaining an dared to come to a compromise with Mr. advantage at the cost of Protestantism in Gladstone. But with Mr. Parnell in his Ireland? The plain truth is that with the grave a compromise is possible, if not general tendency of modern thought to probable. The Irish priesthood have re-discard, or at any rate to depreciate, belief covered their political ascendency; and in dogma, Dissent and Nonconformity the Nationalists are now, for all practical have lost their reason of being. I do not purposes, mere nominees of the Catholic assert for one moment that the great body Church in Ireland. All, therefore, that of Dissenters have lost all faith in the Mr. Gladstone has got to do is to come particular doctrines professed by their reto terms with Dr. Walsh and his fellow-spective sects. But I say without hesita ecclesiastics; and if he can do this he may tion that dogmatic faith is on the wane, be sure that the Nationalists will obey and that, as a necessary corollary, the anorders and vote for his resolution, even if tagonism between the Established Church they are not altogether satisfied with the and Dissent has become not so much reextent of his concessions. Now to come ligious, as social and political. Thus, so to terms with the Irish clergy is a far long as the Conservatives are opposed to easier task than to come to an understand- disestablishment the Dissenters will suping with the Irish Nationalists. The port the Liberals, even if their support priests and especially the higher orders should involve the surrender of the Protof the priesthood care far more about estant cause in the sister kingdom. The ecclesiastical autonomy than they do about English Liberals, as a body, will follow legislative independence. If, therefore, Mr. Gladstone blindly; and the Irish NaMr. Gladstone should be prepared to ne- tionalists will accept the orders of their gotiate with the Irish episcopate on the spiritual masters. With the exception of basis of giving over the control of national the handful of Parnellites, every Irish education in Ireland, virtually, if not nom- Nationalist member is aware that he owes inally, to the priesthood, and of allowing his seat to the influence of the priests, and the Parliament of Dublin full authority to that if he incurs their displeasure he can. deal with all ecclesiastical questions, his not look for re-election. But even if this .clerical allies would, I think, be found were otherwise the Nationalists-howready to recommend their representatives ever little they may trust Mr. Gladstone at Westminster to submit to such restric-- would, I think, come in the end to the tions on the political authority of the Irish Parliament as might in his opinion be necessary to satisfy the scruples of the English Liberal members, and to confirm the Liberal party outside Parliament in the delusion that by granting Home Rule they were not actually consenting to the repeal of the Union. To a compromise of this kind Mr. Gladstone himself would, I fancy, offer no objection. In the case of a statesman all of whose convictions are of a fluid order it is difficult to form any positive opinion as to the stability or instability of any particular conviction. But it may be said without injustice that throughout his public career Mr. Glad stone has always manifested a bias towards conclusion that they have more to gain by putting Mr. Gladstone into office, even without specific conditions, than they have by keeping the Unionists in power. They are fully alive to the pressure they can bring to bear upon the Liberals if ever the latter attempt to place real restrictions on the power of the proposed Irish Parlia ment, and they are perfectly aware that if once an Irish Parliament and an Irish executive are established the removal of any restrictions placed on their authority is a mere question of time. No rational man in his senses supposes that if the government of Ireland were once entrusted to an Irish Parliament, England would go to war with Ireland because this |