much misunderstanding upon such questions as the New Hebrides, New Guinea, and Chinese immigration. Now an [reduced] Irish representation at Westminster (with numbers proportionate to Ireland’s Imperial contribution) would, without making any vital change in the English Constitution, furnish a precedent by which the self-governing Colonies could from time to time, as they expressed a desire to contribute to Imperial expenditure, be incorporated with the Imperial Legislature. You will perhaps say that I am making the Irish question a stalking-horse for a scheme of Imperial Federation; but if so, I am at least placing Ireland in the forefront of the battle.
The question is, moreover, one in which I take a deep interest, and I shall be obliged if you can tell [assure] me that Mr. MacNeill is not mistaken in the impression he conveyed to me, and that you and your Party would be prepared to give your hearty support and approval to a Home Rule Bill containing provisions for the continuance of Irish representation at Westminster. Such a declaration would afford great satisfaction to myself and others, and would enable us to give our full and active support to your cause and your Party.
I shall be happy to contribute to the funds of the Party to the extent of £10,000. I am also, under the circumstances, authorised to offer you a further sum of £1,000 from Mr. John Morrogh, an Irish resident at Kimberley, South Africa.—Yours faithfully, C. J. Rhodes.
Note.—The portions of this letter printed in italics are the omissions made by Parnell from the original draft submitted to him. The word “Council” on page 124, in brackets, and the word “assure” on page 125, in brackets, were omitted in favour of mere verbal alterations.