The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1888-06-30 00:00:00

MESSAGE FROM THE THRONE.

In the HOUSE OF COMMONS, her Majesty's reply to
the Address of Condolence on the death of the German
Emperor was brought down by Lord A. Hill.

COMING BUSINESS.

Mr. W. H. Smith informed Mr. Rendel that it was
the intention of the Government to proceed with the
Under Secretary for Ireland Bill. In answer to Mr.
Summers, the right hon. gentleman said that if the
English Sunday Closing Bill was not reached on July
11, for which day it was set down, the Government,
having regard to the great public interest felt in the
question, would endeavour to find an opportunity for
its discussion.

GOVERNMENT IRISH POLICY.--NOTE OF CENSURE
DEBATE.

Mr. Morley moved, "That in the opinion of the
House the operation of the Criminal Law and Procedure
(Ireland) Act, 1887, and the manner of its administra-
tion, undermine respect for law, estrange the minds of
the people of Ireland, and are deeply injurious to the
interests of the United Kingdom." Premising that
Ireland has now been suffering under repressive legisla-
tion for more than a year, that 17 members of the House
had been imprisoned during that time, that in one
gaol there were now more than 40 persons under
this Act, that the collisions between the police and the
people had been of almost unexampled frequency since
the Act was passed, and that the Court of Exchequer
in Ireland had recently pronounced a judgment which
discredited the most important part of the machinery
by which the Act was administered, the right hon.
gentleman accepted Mr. W. H. Smith's interpretation
of the resolution as "a challenge of the conduct of the
Government in every respect." It challenged the jus-
tice, the expediency, the wisdom, and even the allega-
tions of the transient success of the Government
policy. Adverting to the imprisonment of Mr. Dillon,
he complained that the Government had issued an
ex post facto proclamation for the purpose of im-
prisoning a political opponent. The inequalities of
the administration of the Act, and in the treatment
of those who were convicted under its provisions,
showed that the Government's pretence of equal and
impartial administration was a mockery. They had
placed every possible obstacle in the way of legal diffi-
culties being referred to the higher tribunals of the
country, and had employed agents provaeateurs for the
purpose of creating offences upon which prosecutions
might be instituted. With regard to the resident
magistrates, by whom the Act was administered, he
submitted that the decision of the Court of Exchequer
justified all that had been said as to their unfitness for
the task. The harshness and brutality with which the
Act was enforced, he contended, had not increased
respect for the law, or promoted good feeling between
the Irish people and the Government, but effectually
alienated the sympathy of the people from the law and
enlisted it on the side of the offenders.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer declared that it was
the persistent efforts of the Opposition to introduce
a new standard of morality and law, and a new in-
terpretion of the duties of citizens, that had made
Ireland what it was. The predecessors of the present
Government, he pointed out, did not leave Ireland in a
state in which there was much respect for law or much
affection for this country; and there was not a charge
made against the present Government which had not
been made in previous Parliaments against Liberal
Governments. As to the imprisonment of Mr.
Dillon, it surely could not be forgotten that
Mr. Parnell was imprisoned by Mr. Gladstone, and
by what right, he asked, did the Liberal party
venture to say that men as honourable as themselves
were actuated by a desire to put their political
opponents in gaol? Mr. Dillon was imprisoned for
advocating a policy which would "make the fate of
the traitor" to the "plan of campaign" "an unhappy
fate" by methods which the House knew only too well.
No doubt there had been cases in Ireland, as in Eng-
land, in which magistrates had made mistakes; but,
on the other hand, the Government had made good
progress in dimishing agrarian crime by means of the
Crimes Act; and what was still more important, had
brought to justice the perpetrators of two atrocious
murders who otherwise would not have been con-
victed. They could now see signs of being able to
break down the "plan of campaign" on estates where
the most stupendous efforts had been made to sustain
it. The aim of the Government was not, however,
merely to vindicate and uphold the law; they desired
to increase the number of owners of land, to develop
the material resources of Ireland, and to decentralise
its administration; and if they could not win the
affections of the people of Ireland they would neverthe-
less endeavour to treat them as an integral portion of
the United Kingdom.
The debate was continued by Mr. R. T. Reid, the
Solicitor-General for Ireland, Mr. J. Sinclair, Mr. T.
W. Russell (who declared that the Crimes Act had
made life possible and endurable for many
thousands of honest men in Ireland., Mr. Shaw-
Lefevre, who defended the "Plan of Cam-
paign," and by Colonel Sanderson who vehemently
denounced the policy of the National League and
expressed his cipviction that the present Government
would deliver Ireland from the tyranny of the
League. On the motion of Mr.W. O'Brien, the debate
was adjourned.