New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-07-01
A SUGGESTIVE SCENE IN THE HOUSE
OF COMMONS

On the evening Of the 14th inst there was
quite n scene in the British House OF Com
mons. 1t appears that, some six weeks before,
a petition had been presented to the House by
Mr. John Bright on behalf of the Fenans,
urging that they should be treated with leni-
ency, and dcprecating such a course on the
part of the military employed in suppressing
the disturbances in Ireland as that which, in
IiI,.- l.,,i..o >"poy mutiny, and in Ja-
maica in 1865, had inflicted indelible disgrace
on the British army. The reception of the
petition was opposed at the time, but the OBJ
jections taken against it were Overruled and
the document was accordingly duly received,
and, in accordance with Parliamentary usage,
ordered 10 be printed on the minutes of the
House. On the evening in question Major
Arson mved for the discharge of the order
that the petition do lie on the table," and,
further for the canceling of the printed record
of the document, giving as the reason
for his notion that the petition was an
insult to thearmy, and an insult to the whole
nation. In making his motion, the gall
liant Major wmmly defended the conduct of
the British amy in dealing with the Indian
mutny, and Indignantly repudated the charges
brought against it by the petitioners. He was
replied to by several members, among them
Mr.. John Stmrt Mill, who in spirited and
incsive speed, ayowed his entire sympathy
with the sentiments embodied in the petition
branded the drocities committed by the British
army during he Indian mutiny as a disgrace
to humanity, md pleaded for leniency for the
Fenians, on tie ground that although they had
made Themselves amenable to the law, yet
their conduit was only that of which men of
honor, actig under mistaken sense of honor
might be apable. Mr.. Mlls's speech reused
thei ire of ortain honorable members, and great
deal of acimony was INDUCED in. One thought
the petition contemplate" Another described
the petitiolers as men of revolutionary opinions
and the foemost of them as a man of infdel
tenets. AID third charged Mr.. MIL with
being patty to zone of tho grossest persecu-
tons tina had ever been perpetrated
prosecutionof ex-Gov. Eyre. Mr.. Dright-who
happened b be absent from the House on the
occasiOn-ome in for. a large share of con-
demnation, The misery and sufferings of a
great many of the unfortunate Fenians were
attributed to his incendiary speeches. He
had, on q certain occasion, said one
of the Seakers, told Irishmen that if
gland the landlords would be extelminated
"And wha was that" asked the indignant
orator, "bt an Indictment to assassination ~
VOciferous we're the cries of shear, hear" when
Bright was attacked, and loud the shouts of
ooh, Oh,p when the truth was spoken. But
the Radicals stoutly held their ground, seeing
which Mr.. Bisraeli prudently advised Major
Arson to withdraw his motion but the Ma
jors excited friends insisted on his pressing it
to division, which was done, great many of
tue members leaving the House before the
votes were talen. The result was the rejec-
ton of the nption.
A scene lila this brings out into bold relief
what must 10 regarded as one of the
most hopeful features in the political
life of England at the present time. We allude
to the spirit and courage with which certain
members of the popular branch of the British
legislature are wont to plead for liberty, and
justice, and truth, in the face of that powerful
and menacing Ihalanx Of aristocracy and priv
ilege which has hitherto carried everything
before it in the old country. Had Bright been
present, we can fancy how he would have
but Mil, who is evidently warming to his
work, and acquiring from use greater freedom
and power 10 debate, ably supplied the place
of the great tgibpne; and Mr. Neate was
bold enough to renf;ad the House that, how
ever ready England was ID encourage hsur-
rection in other countries, ID relentless dspo-
sition had been shown when dealing with re-