Mr. Labouchere continued, as will be seen by the following {180} letters to Mr. Chamberlain, to press the views of the Irish leaders upon the Government. 10 QUEEN ANNE'S GATE, June 3, 1882. DEAR CHAMBERLAIN,--We have done our best during your absence to hold our own against Harcourt. The only important issue yet raised has been the exclusion of treason and treason felony from the Bill. On Thursday I went to Grosvenor from Parnell to ask that the debate should be adjourned. Gladstone said that Parnell ought to consider that after Harcourt's "no surrender" speech the Government would not be able to give in the next day, and that the division if taken would be larger on Thursday than on Friday, and that the matter might be reconsidered in Report. I said that if Government would give any private assurance, or if Gladstone would say in the House, that the exclusion would be favourably considered on Report, he could have the division at once. This latter he was afraid to do, for Harcourt, as sulky as a bear, was glaring at him. He therefore agreed to consent "with regret" to the adjournment. When, however, Parnell moved it, our idiots and the Conservatives shouted so loudly "no," that a division had to be taken. Then Healy moved it, on which Gladstone did hint at the Report, but said nothing definite, except that it would be impossible to consult at once with the Irish Executive. The next day, Grosvenor wrote to me to say that he spoke without prejudice and held out no hope, but would I call "Parnell's attention to one sentence in one of Gladstone's concluding speeches, which was to the effect that it was impossible to call the attention of the Irish Government to the question of omitting treason and treason felony, between last night and this day, and therefore it would be better to bring up the question again on Report. Please ask Parnell to consider this fact." On Friday morning the Irish held a meeting, and they agreed to keep what they did secret, decided that if treason were retained, at least treason felony should be eliminated. On the House meeting Trevelyan tackled me, and said: "I am opposed to the insertion of treason and treason felony, and {181} I am disposed to make large concessions. You know that I am a person of strong will. I now understand the Bill, and you will see how I shall act." Grosvenor also said that I need not believe him, as he quite agreed with me, but that Harcourt was the difficulty. I asked him whether he would agree that if Lord Spencer said that treason and treason felony were not needed, they should be struck out on Report. He replied that the onus could not be thrown on Spencer, but that it must be the act of the Cabinet. So after seeing Parnell it was agreed that the division should be taken at 7.30.