On the other hand, in the corresponding document from the Nationalist side, the importance of immediate and full fiscal control had been put very high.

“Self-government does not exist,” it said, “where those nominally entrusted with affairs of government have not control of fiscal and economic policy.  No nation with self-respect could accept the idea that while its citizens were regarded as capable of creating wealth they were regarded as incompetent to regulate the manner in which taxation of that wealth should be arranged, and that another country should have the power of levying and collecting taxes, the taxed country being placed in the position of a person of infirm mind whose affairs are regulated by trustees.  No finality could be looked for in such an arrangement, not even a temporary satisfaction.”

The genesis of this passage should be told, for it had importance in the history of the Convention; and also it conveys an idea of the limits to which Redmond carried self-effacement.  It is important because it acted on Ulster like a red rag shown to a bull.  Obviously, if this were the Nationalist view, then the Home Rule Act could not be said to give self-government—­for under its system of contract finance Ireland certainly had not control of her fiscal and economic policy.  A measure accepted with enthusiasm in 1912 was now regarded as impossible of giving “even a temporary satisfaction.”

What had happened was this.  The Chairman in his tireless efforts to bring about agreement had addressed two sets of questions, to the Nationalists and to the Ulstermen respectively, by answering which he hoped they might clear the air.  The direct answers for the Nationalists were drafted by Mr. Russell, but were shown to Redmond, Mr. Devlin and the Bishop of Raphoe.  It was, however, suggested that as an addendum a summary should be added.  Redmond did not ask to see this addition, and it was not shown to him.  It led off with the paragraph which has been quoted.  The fact that he allowed anything in any stage of such a negotiation to go out in his name without his own revision marks the loosening of grip—­a tired man.

His exertions for the past years, the past ten years at least, had been tremendous:  they had been redoubled from 1912 to 1916.  Towards the end, one resource had been failing him—­the chief of all.  A leader when he is well followed gives and takes; there is interchange of energy.  For more than a year now Redmond had lacked the moral support, the almost physical stimulus, which comes from the ready response of followers.  Labour at no time came easy to him, there was much inertia in his temperament; and the part which he had laid out for himself in the Convention as merely an individual member did not impose on him the same unremitting vigilance as if he acted as leader.  Yet, the leadership was his; if he did not exercise it, no one else could; and this incident shows that his abnegation of leadership was not a mere phrase.