Read what some of the Leaders of the present Opposition have recently said about Home Rule.

Who among them has ever said that Home Rule is abandoned as a part of the Radical Policy?

Several of them have said the very reverse! And, if the Liberal Party were returned to power, and were dependent on the Irish votes, they would have to bring in another Home Rule Bill

Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman said at Hull on March 8th, 1899-" Why, gentlemen, how then can we, as long as we use the name of Liberal, how can we abandon our Irish policy? We will remain true to the Irish people as long as the Irish people are true to themselves. Twice we have essayed to embody this policy in a Statute, and twice we have been foiled."

Sir Edward Grey said at Darlington, 8th September, 1898 "The Act had not settled the Irish Question. At some future date the Irish demand would have to be met in the spirit in which Mr. Gladstone endeavoured to meet it."

Mr. John Morley said at Montrose, 19th January, 1899-" All he had to say for himself was this, that if the Irish demand for a National Assembly was persisted in, and if the demand were presented, as it was in 1886, for a subordinate Assembly, then British Liberals would be no more justified in retreating from the arguments which they had all pressed than their forefathers felt themselves free to fling overboard

the cause of Catholic Emancipation."

Mr. Asquith said at Darwen, 27th January, 1899—— "For his part he retained to the full without qualification, modification, or reserve, all the views he had held and expressed on the Irish Question since he entered public life

The problem might be shelved, but it could not be got rid of."

A Mr. Herbert Gladstone said at Leeds, 11th October, 1898 "Don't tell me Home Rule is dead. It is not. The prospects of Home Rule were never brighter."

3

On the same occasion Mr. Herbert Gladstone said that what Sir Wm. Harcourt would declare at the next election would be "We are Home Rulers; we stick to Home Rule, and we are prepared to give you Home Rule in full Measure.".

Lord Tweedmouth said at St. Helens, 14th October, 1898" For himself, he stood where he did with regard to Home Rule, and nothing would induce him to see it struck out of the Liberal programme.”

Lord Ripon said at Brampton, 10th November, 1898. "Now I will take some of them (the items of the Newcastle Programme), and first and foremost, in my estimation at all events, the question of Home Rule,

trust that the Liberal Party will never abandon the promises and pledges which it has given to the Irish people."

If a Parliament be given to Ireland, Mr. Michael Davitt will no doubt be a prominent and influential Member of it. This is what he said on 26th August, 1900, about England and Englishmen "I am now convinced that it (The British Empire) is the greatest Empire the world has ever seen, in some respects let me add, and mainly in three attributes. It is unquestionably the greatest Empire of liars, of hypocrites, and of poltroons, judged by its achievements in South Africa, that has ever postured before mankind with a civilising mission. Its Statesmen have lied, its Churchmen have lied, its Press have lied, and its Soldiers have lied about the people whom they all wanted to rob of their country and its liberties."

ELECTORS!

DO NOT THEREFORE BELIEVE ANY CANDIDATE WHO TELLS YOU THAT HOME RULE IS DEAD!

Printed and Published by McCorquodale & Co. Limited, "The Armoury," London, S.E.

Gladstonians are apt to tell working men that they have received and can expect no consideration from the Unionist Party.

Let the Railway Workmen determine whether this statement is true or false.

We need not go far back to prove that it is false.

Before 1897 a workman could recover compensation for injury only in cases where the negligence of his employer or foreman could be proved. This condition was so difficult to fulfil that in only about 12 per cent. of the accidents which occurred to workmen could compensation be obtained. The Radicals introduced a Bill which would have enabled only about 20 per cent. of workmen injured to recover damages from their employers. The Bill also would have destroyed the Mutual Benefit Societies comprising 500,000 work people-Societies which afforded relief in respect of injuries proceeding from any cause-and so deficient was this Bill that it was rejected by Parliament.

But the present Government took a different view of the amount of protection which should be afforded to workmen, and in 1897 the Compensation to Workmen Act was passed. The principles of this measure were years ago advocated by Mr. Chamberlain, and by him and the Home Secretary the Bill was framed and carried through Parliament.

Its provisions are well known; workmen who are injured from whatever cause whilst engaged in their work can now obtain compensation for the injuries they sustain. Amongst the classes of the workmen entitled to the benefit of this comprehensive Act railway men were specifically named.

Now compare the benefits derived from this Act of Parliament with anything ever effected, or proposed to be effected, by the Gladstonian Party for Railway Workmen. That Party never thought of proposing any measure so wide and so beneficent as this Act. When it was proposed they looked at it hesitatingly and jealously and would have opposed it if they had dared. But now it is on the Statute Book, and Railway Workmen have to thank the present Unionist Government for it.

But there is another Act passed during the late Session for which Railway Workers ought to be quite as grateful.

During the last two years the attention of the Government was called to the terrible number of accidents happening to certain classes of Railway Servants. The SHUNTERS, the men in the GOODS YARDS, and the Platelayers were found to be carrying on the most dangerous trade known in this country. Deaths and Injuries showed a terrible proportion.

In the Spring of 1899, Mr. Ritchie, the President of the Board of Trade, introduced a Bill into the House of Commons, the principal object of which was to prevent men working between the wagons. To effect this it was proposed that automatic couplings should be universally employed within a certain number of years. Objection was made that no automatic coupling suitable to our railway system was yet known.

Yielding to this objection Mr. Ritchie agreed to the appointment of a Royal Commission to inquire into the subject. Never has a Commission done better or quicker work than that accomplished by the Railway Accidents Commission. Lord James of Hereford, a Cabinet Minister, presided over it. In a few weeks a mass of evidence had been taken, and in the course of a few months a most conclusive and unanimous Report was presented to the Queen. If Railway Men will read that Report they will see how great was the consideration shown to their interests. Let them ask Mr. R. Bell if this is not so.

At the opening of the late Session of Parliament Mr. Ritchie introduced a Bill carrying out almost every recommendation of that Report-and that Bill has now become Law.

Let any Railway Worker note what a very Charter of protection for them that Act amounts to. Let every Railway Worker obtain a copy of it and note what has been done for him. To the Board of Trade is given full power to treat the operations of the Railway Workers as a dangerous trade—and to make rules for the regulation and control of such operations. Twelve specific reforms in the mode of working are declared in the Act to be necessary. It is hoped and believed by practical men that henceforth and through the operation of this Act the loss of life and injuries sustained by Railway Men will be most substantially diminished.

And the credit for such a beneficent result must be given by every just man solely to the members of the present Unionist Government.

Printed and Published by McCorquodale & Co. Ltd., "The Armoury," London, S.E.

FRIEND OR FOE.

BRITON COR BOER.

THE NEW YORK'
PUBLIC LIBRARY

Those who are not for us-are

"Choose your side, sir,

No

The fence time is over.
You must stand up and fight."

79229

against us.

ASTOR, LENOX AND
TILDEN F
STIONS

choose your side. more sitting down.

Such is the language electors should use to every candidate before them.

For this country now stands on its trial before the world. Those who love the Boers-those who wish well to their cause-are our accusers. Even a nation can be indicted-so plead and answer must.

No man can stand neutral in this contest. Let every candidate say whether he approves or disapproves of his country's policy-"Yes" or "No" he must answer.

It is not enough for a candidate to say that he thinks the war was inevitable, or that Great Britain must be the paramount Power in South Africa. Do not be deceived by such words. They sound well, but practically mean nothing.

The only question of importance now is, whether the policy that has been pursued by the Government is right and ought to be carried out without faltering to its very end. And that question can be solved only by determining another-different in words but the same in substance: Are the present Government to continue in office or to be dismissed from it?