The proposition of Home Rule and Ireland in the 19th Century had always been one of the main reasons why divisions in the liberal party occurred. For one, Gladstone believed in the welfare of the people where necessary in Ireland because of ‘ineffective coercion’ (Source A). Even though it was not always in Gladstone’s nature to support home rule and he did have a change of heart, the importance was that Gladstone was determined to support it at any cost. As a result of Gladstone’s determination, whatever Gladstone used to propose, it was rejected by many people in the liberal party. The Whigs rejected Gladstone’s motions for Home Rule as it ‘would greatly lessen English responsibility’ (Source B) and this was a big blunder for the liberal party as it was the start of a division of agreement. Whilst Gladstone was determined to make a dramatic change for Ireland, the rejection of the Whigs was significant as it hindered Gladstone’s progression towards Home Rule significantly and weakened the party. If this did not work, when Gladstone changed his ways of enforcing his ideas of Home Rule through force and ‘coercion’ it was ‘ineffective’ (Source A) for Ireland as a whole but ALSO the Liberal party became virtually ineffective when Chamberlain and Dilks resigned from their posts in the party. This was significant as it was a clear opposition to Gladstone and the loss of members shows that Irish Home Rule was the blame for the resignation of two very influential and important members. The importance of this resignation lay also in the fact that it became clear now in and outside the party that there was growing disagreement between the Liberal Unionists and MPs. It became a growing sign of disruption of consensus with the party that would lead to disastrous effects in the future whether Home Rule was issued or not. Therefore Home Rule and Ireland in general was one of the reasons why divisions and weaknesses in the Liberal party were emerging.
On the contrary, there were also other issues aside from the dispute of Irish Home Rule that made weaknesses within the liberal party more apparent. For one, it was the clear opposition between two groups, the ‘Radicals’ such as Joseph Chamberlain and the ‘Whigs’ such as Lord Hartington. In Source C, it tells us about Joseph Chamberlain and his ‘political ambitions’ which suggests that he was motivated by his own ambitions meaning he was –in a way- selfish and did not contribute to the party to moderate his beliefs thus he ‘wrecked’ home Rule. So it can be argued that Joseph Chamberlain himself was one of the reasons why the Liberal party was becoming weak. In terms of these two very different groups within the party, it can be considered that the effects of the Irish Home Rule were not very influential in the division of the party and rather, it was the mere lack of consensus in general that was bad. Also, the mere way that Gladstone was running the government was also another reason that created divisions in the party. Gladstone was overwhelmed with finance after becoming the Chancellor of the Exchequer. This was a completely hindrance as Gladstone’s mind was busied with economy rather than pressing matters with Foreign Policy at the time. Gladstone resigned soon after but it was too late; the damage concerning foreign policy was done. It can be argued that if Gladstone had not taken on the role of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and paid attention to issues such as Home Rule, it would have not divided the party. Furthermore, Gladstone’s foreign and imperial policies had also been a disaster previously; closely regarding the disaster in Sudan. The effect of this was that it greatly made the government unpopular with the public. He had already embarrassed the liberal party it would have become a blunder to their pride as a party and the public were already unhappy with them. Gladstone realized that ‘something had to be done’ (Source A) but the Sudan Crisis had become a set back in any progression of the liberal party as a team.
In conclusion, I believe that because Gladstone was so in tune with making Home Rule successful, it clouded the prospect of disaster and division. I believe that this created the divison within the party more than the debate of Irish Home Rule. It was bad that people in his own party were beginning to stray him but even worse when the liberals moved to the conservatives; it shows that there was more to the weaknesses in the party than just the dispute about Home Rule, and that people in the liberal party seemed to be unhappy with other methods of Gladstone’s in the past (Such as social reform etc). Suffice to say, I believe that Gladstone’s character and ways of handling the Irish matter created most division, along with his method of governing previously. Regardless, I still believe that the Irish Home Rule dispute played a completely vital role in dividing the party as it was a catalyst for division, but not the main cause for the weakness of the liberal party.