The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1887-05-07 00:00:00

IRk'SII CRIMES BILL.

The House was engaged during the whole of the
evening in Committee on the Criminal Law Amend.
ment (Ireland) Bill. Om the first clause, which gives
power to hold preliminary inquiries in proclaimed
districts, Mr. T. Healy moved the first amendment,
leaving out the general words "proclaimed dis-
tricts," in order to ascertain certain specified counties
with a view of securing the application of the in-
quiry c'auso to Belfast.—Mr, A. J. Balfour declined
to give any assurances except that the Act would
be administered impartially, and in the course of
the discussion, Mr. Gladstone, enlarging on the
disorder prevalent in the Protestant counties, empha-
sised the necessity of applying the bill to those counties,
but suggested the withdrawal of the amendment and
the discussion of the question at a later stage.—Lord
R. Churchill agreed that this would be the more con-
venient course, but in answer to the allegation as to the
condition of the North, ridiculed the notion of com-
paring the Belfast rioters with the Kerry moonlighters;
and, after some further discussion with reference to
miscarriages of justice in Belfast, the amendment was
withdrawn.
Mr. M. Healy moved an amendment to the same
clause, to limit the right of the ttorney General for
Ireland to order a preliminary inquiry to those cases
where, owing to intimidation or other improper cause,
evidence has been withheld.— Sir W. Harcourt and Sir
0. Russell supported the amendment, which was
opposed by the Attorney• General, and it was negatived
on a division by 206 to 110.
Mr. M. Healy next moved an amendment requiring
that the consent of the High Court shall be obssrned
before an inquiry be held.—The SolieitGeneral
opposed it on the gronnd that it defeat the
object aimed at by the inquiry is was discussed at
grelt length, and just betore midnight Mr NV'. H.
Smith moved the application of the closure, which was
carried on a x.ision by 257 to 135. The amendment
was .4. put and was negatived by 261 to 142.
An amendment to exempt the application of the
clause when any person bas been made amenable for
the offence proposed to be inquired into, also moved
by 111 r. 111, Healy, was discussed for three quarters of
an hour and then withdrawn, after which the Com-
mittee adjourned.
The House adjourned at two o'clock.

The HOUSE OF LORDS held a brief sitting on May 3rd,
at which no business of public importance was trims-
acted.

THE MAHARAJAH DHULEEP SINGH.
In the HOUSE OF COMMONS Sir J. E. Gorst informed
Sir G. Campbell that the Maharajah Dhuleep Singh
was not at present drawing any allowance from the
Indian Government, he having some months ago de-
clined to receive it. His legal and political position
was unaltered.
THE CHARGE AGAINST A MEMBER.
Sir 0. Lewis, as a questien of privilege, called atten-
tion to an article published in the " Times " of the
previous day, in which Mr. John Dillon was charged
with having in his speech in the House on the 22nd
ult., with reference to his connection with P. J.
Sheridan, "Invincible, dynamiter, and assassin," coin..
mitted wilful and deliberate falsehood for the purpose
of deceiving the House.
Extracts from the article having been read by the
clerk at the table' Sir C. Lewis moved that its publica-
tion was a breach of the privileges of the House; and
the motion was seconded by Mr. P. A. Muntz.
Mr. Dillon made no objection to the motion, but
inquired what the course of procedure would be, as
some little time would be necessary for him to prepare
a detailed reply to the charges made against him.
Mr. W. H. Smith suggested that, as no notice had
been given that the question would be raised, it was
only fair and reasonable to all parties that time for
consideration should be allowed. He therefore moved
the adjournment of the debate.
Mr. Healy ch .racterised the motion as most un-
reasonable and unfair to the Irish party, who were
anxious to meet these charges without delay.
Mr. Dillon aloe objected to any adjournment. The
article which had been read was a deliberate, malicious,
and abominable misrepresentationA and he undertook
when the publisher was brought to the Bar to prove
that he was a base and cowardly liar.
Mr. Courtney pointed out that a vast number of
members of the House had not yet seen the article
complained of, and were not in a position to decide
off-hand whether it was or was not a breach of privi-
lege. He, therefore, supported the motion for adjourn-
ment.
Lord R. Churchill thought the notion of the Leader
of the House was, under all the circumstances, a wise
one, and deprecated the idea that all libelous attacks
made by zewspapers upon members of Parliament
should be treated as breaches of privilege.
Mr. Sexton complained that the Irish members had
been pursued for years by moral assassins, until their
position in that House had become almost intolerable.
Now that the opportunity was at last afforded them
of brirging their calumniators to book, it would bo
discreditable to the Government and dishonouring to
the House to put them off by an evasive motion for
adjournment.
Mr. Chaplin supported the adjournment on the
ground that it was impossible to arrive at a decision
when the great majority of members did not know
what the article contained.
Mr. Bradlaugh, on behalf of the Radical members,
protested against delay whilst the charges against
Irish members were being repeated at public meetings
for the purpose of influencing popular opinion in
favour of the Crimes Bill.
Sir W. Harcourt remarked that Sir C. Lewis's
motion, though ostensibly directed against the
"Times " newspaper, was really a covert and hardly-
veiled charge of falsehood against a member of the
House, and as that member and his friends demanded
instant redress he could not understand how the House
could hesitate for one moment.

The Attorney• General, who denied that tbe
Government had been consulted with referecce to the
subject being brought forward, expressed a doubt
whether it really was one of breach of privilege, and
urged that time should be given for full consideration
before a decision was arrived at.

Mr. Lockwood, Mr. Justin M'Oarthy, and Mr.
Labouchere having spoken against the motion for
i.douriinent, Su C. Lewis declared that he should vote
abaiest it.
Mr. Gladstone pressed the Government to withdraw
the motion arguing that the rule of the House in such
cares had been to arrive at an immediAte decision. The
necessity for careful inquiry arose at the subsequent
stages, and, if the House thought fit, a Select Oom.
mittee could be appointed to inquire into the circum-
staucee.
The Solicitor-General had very grave doubts whether
this was a case of breach of privilege, and in reference
to the suggestion that there should be an inq iry by a
Select Oommitte, he thought the House would commit
a serious error of judgment if It referred the utattei
to so inadequate a tribunal, while other tribunals far
more competent to deal with it were open.
Mr. Whttbread, Mr. T. D. Sullivan, and Sir H. Tyler
opposed the motion for the adjournment of the debate,
but on a division it was carried by 213 to 174, and after
some fur ther discussion the debate was adjourned until
Tuesday.