New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-10-12
LANDLEAGUE AND LAND ACT
onsT,c1rs IN THE WAY OF REFORM.

OF The RECENT LAND LEAGUE CONVENTION
MR. FORsIEh'S EFFORTS TO GET THE LAND ACT
ACCEPTED BY TIE IRISH PEoPLE-How THE
LEAGUE Is TRYING To CREATE plsSATIsFACIloN
WITH THE WORKINGS OF THE ACT-PARNELLS
FEELING TOWARD MR.. FORSTER.
IRON THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE TkIbuNt'l
LoyroT, Sept. CIT was announced the other
day. think it appeared in the fashionable intel
Fgcncr that M Chamberlain had gone on visit
to Mr. Forster at Dublin. Those who knew any
thing of the relations and political divergences OF
these two members OF the Cabinet thought the Visit
an odd one and oddly timed. Those. moreover VINO
believe that the true policy of the Government to-
ward Irish macoutentS is Iohcy OF hrmneSS' an
cured iii from the appearance Of Mr. Chamberlain
upor the scene lie was from the first an opponent
Of a FIRM policy His idea of governing Ireland was
TO let Mr.. Pancll govern it 1t is believed though
of course nobody outside the Cabinet and tie circle
of Mr. ChamberlainS familiars really knows, that
lie urrssted i'm his opposition to the Coercion bill TO
the last-or rather to the last but one for when
ontyotcd he certainly did not resign. lie has since
Given his adhesion 10 the Iush measures of the Gov
eminent of which ne is member. If hc has not
supported them very actively lie has acquIesccd IN
| Them On one occasion. certainly, he defended
Coercion in a public speech. But it is not supposed
| hy Mr.. Chambcrlans friends that he likes seeing
his own views oycrrulcd, or that he has heartily
espouscd the vowS of the majority of his colleagues
| It's an open secret moreover. that Mr.. Chamber
| lain. in common with other BIRMINGHAM Radicals.
induced himself in feeling OF personal resentment
| on account of Mr.. ForSter's compromise with the
| Church on the Education question in 1870 Down
to very late period-latcG than that of tie forna.
ton of the present Government there were ndica-
tons that this feeling had not loosoncd its hold on
Mr. Chamberlain 1t was thought wrongly pre-
sumc-to have had something to do with the line
the President of the Board of Trade took on Irish
| matters ! say wrongly because it is quite incon
ccivab,c that member of tho Cabinet should allow
his mind to be influenced on question of high
public policy ny ancient animosty against an
other member of the same Cabinet upon whom de-
volved in the first instance, the responsibility Of
proposing that policy. When one gets on such
dangerous ground this II Is better TO dismiss al
together the question of motives. The essential
thing is not the motive of Mr.. Chamheraii's con-
duct or opinions, but the conduct and opinions
themselves He is much bclicd if he be not still IN
favor of very much larger concessions to continuing
Irish agitation than his colleagues are. lf-whch
is I admit a violent" hypothc>i,-f the Land
League have a sympathiZcr or an apooglst inside
the Cabinet and il were necessary TO identify him,
| there is nobody but Mr.. Chamberlain at whom the
public finger would point. Whether he would
| think himself cruelty ma!igucd by being thus
| SINGLED ont as the ad,oodhs ddboH, can't say.
| The time may come when he would assert the SIM
gularity of Lis position as title to reward H. Tor
| example the Irish views of certain evening
| journal should in the end prevail Mr.. Chamber
lain advocacy of similar views inside the Cabinet
might constitute claim to the gratitude of one
fragment Ct a di,uembcrcd empire. Whatever
attitude he may take officially the gossip Of jour
uaIism is siu-ul.r,y misleading il the influence
which has warmed the cuur~r of that able exponent