40 PRINCE'S GARDENS, S.W., Feb. 15, 1886.[3] MY DEAR LABOUCHERE,--... As regards out future policy I can say nothing at present, but I think that a closer inspection of the difficulties in the way has brought Mr. Gladstone nearer to me than he was when he first came to London. If Parnell is impracticable my hope is that we may all agree to give way to the Tories and let them do the coercion which will then be necessary. They will be supported for this purpose by a clear majority in the country and probably in the House. As for passing Home Rule resolutions at the present time, I utterly disbelieve in its possibility.--Yours very truly, J. CHAMBERLAIN. _Mr. Labouchere to Mr. Chamberlain_[4] 10 QUEEN ANNE'S GATE, March 31, 1886. MY DEAR CHAMBERLAIN,--There would be much joy in the Radical heaven if things could be hit off with you, and they would all be ready to put Elijah's mantle on you if they could come to some agreement as to this damned Irish question. The feeling is, I think, this: they are in favour of Home Rule, and do not particularly care about details, provided that the scheme settles the matter. They do not love the Irish, but hate them, and would give them Home Rule on the Gladstone or Canada pattern to get rid of them. Home Rule, therefore, whatever the Whigs may say, will be carried. They are dead against any employment of English credit for the Irish landlords or Irish tenants. This--whatever the detail of Mr. Gladstone's plan may be--will be lost. I rather suspect that the revered G.O.M. is playing a game; he is bound to Spencer, therefore he is to bring in his Land Bill. But, if it meets with disapproval, is it likely that he will throw {318} up the Home Rule sponge for the sake of Spencer and the Irish landlords? Will he not rather say that it is a detail of a great project, and not an essential one?