The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1881-02-18
THE CASE OF MICHAEL DAvlTT.

grounds on which Michael Davitt has
been consigned to prison, this act of
the British Government looks to US
like Il harsh and panic stricken meas
ure.
That in the arrest and commitment
of the Irish agitator the law officers OF
the Crown were acting strictly within
the lines of their technical competence,
is of course indisputable. In 1870 Mr..
Davitt was convicted of treason, and
sentenced to fifteen years penal servi-
tude. In 1877 this sentence was con-
ditionally remitted, and the prisoner
received what is known as .sticket of
leave" Theoretically, this mode Of
committing penalty implies that
convict shall enjoy his liberty only
during good behavior. Whether the
condition is fulfilled, whether the libe-
rated convict's conduct is satisfactory,
it is for the executive authority which
granted the commutation to decide.
OF this matter, beyond the simple
question or Identification, courts have
no cognizance. 1t is purely discretion
ary with the Homo Secretary to ac-
cord a ticket Of leave, and to revoke
it lies equally within the untralnmell-
ed exercise of his official discretion.
Thus tho issue raised by the Davitt
case is not whether the recommitment
was legal, but whether it was judicious
and morally defensib!e.
Now, on this point, the adherents of
the Land League allege that there is
no precedent for the action of the
Government in Davitt's case, and that,
consequently, the constructive, reason
able limits of discretion have been
exceeded. The friends of tho Minis
try rejoin that the provocation was
unprecedented. This naturally brings
US to the gist of their defence. 1t is
claimed that in his recent speeches
Davitt's denunciation of the Coercion
bill and his personal attacks on Mr..
Forster were essentially sediiious, and
altogether past the bounds of legitimate
agitation. From the exultation, how
ever, expressed by certain organs of
the Government and the species of con-
sternation with which their coadjutor's
Imprisonment was undoubtedly re-
garded by the Parnell party, we cam
not but infer that Mr.. Davitt's public
utterances were rather the pretext than
the true reason of his arrest. 1t has
leaked out that, in the eyes of the
Secretary for Ireland and of those con-
| versant with the secret workings OF
| the Land League, the unassuming
man now confined in Dartmoor prison
was the most rcdOubtable champion
of Irish land reform. 1t appears that
while Mr.. Parncll has been the chief
spokesman and standard bearer of the
movement, Mr.. Davitt was the cre;a-
tor and impellor of the intricate and
powerful machinery which, according
to the admissions of English news
papers, has established 4 well-nigh alb
solute Government over nearly three.
fourths of Ireland. Not only are the
central principles and elaborate details
by which the Irish people have been
welded into a compact, impenctrable
mass, credited to Mr.. Davitt, but he
is said to have personally secured theil
acceptance and vigorous application in
almost every town and village of Lcin
ster, Munster, and Connaught. Now
we need not say that it is not the
speeches of Mr.. Parnell and other Par
liamentary opponents of the Lane
League which have put an Irresistible
pressure on the English Government
and cXtortcd from 4 Ministry in which
landowners are dominant Il promise o
large tenant relief. No doubt Mr.
Parnell and some of his colleagues ar,
bold, persistent, effective speakers
but, in respect of cloIuencc, they can
not be compared for moment will
OCOnncll, whose agitation Tor repcd
ended in pitiful discontinue. 1t is
not, we repeat, tho orators of the IAant
} League. but the organizers of that trc
mcndous engine OF resistance, O
which the Cabinet stand in awe; ant
; Mr.. Forster doubtless would contend
that in seizing a plausible pretcNt t.
smite the head and front of Il threaten
ing organization he was but perform
ing an indispensable act of self-dcfence
TO all this it may be said that til
, preteXt alleged for Mr.. Davit's i'm
prisonmcnt is but Il meagre one, an
that the more substantial grounds o
which the action of the British Minis
try is defended do, in reality, prov
too much. The language to whic
: exception a. been ,ken has been :e.t
g graphed to Amer lean newspapers, ant
although caustic and vehement, it
; scarcely more so than the utteranccs ft
which it has just proved impossible
- obtain conviction from jury Dul
lin, the very centre OF landlord intluenc
:, Ifit be truly on account of words spoke
on the platform that Mr.. Davitt hs
forfeited his right to be ut large, wh
- could not Mr.. Forster have waited
l.