New-York tribune., 1884-01-03

mOnger. and is now plotting to obtain the Dai-
ance of mower between English parties. 1t Is o
mask, however, which has been worn very care
lessly. When he first took part in the land
agitation he distinctly announced that IL Wouiu
lead I'D to ulteror political ends. when the
Liberal Government went into Office, largely WIN
the aid of Irish votes in English constituencies
he directed his followers to take their seats on
the Opposition benches. He has never conce"ieu
the fact that Home Rule was his objective poihV
and land agitation merely means to that emu
He has always avowed the purpose OF making
the Irish party a separate ana deterihinin5
force in British politics. Mr.. Mccarthy dis-
closed this plan in his letters to The TRIBUNE
two wears ago. 1t is the Irish political policy.
Mr. Parnell has repeatedly advocated it and has
given practical evidence of his intentions by
contesting every by-election in Ireland ana
frequently exerting his influence with Engllsh
constituencies. His recent declaration Is simply
the logical outcome of his political career
Our correspondent sees many signs of dis
LOYALTY in the Dublin banquet. He evidently
believes that Home Rule involves policy OF
secession and separation similar 10 that WIFI
which Jefferson Davis was identified 1t may
be so but we can find in Mr.. Parnells speech
only the wcll-worn idea of Home Kule, IN
volving as much legislative independence a9
each of the Southern States possessed Delore ~
attempted to seccde. The legislative independ-
ence of Hungary conceded in 1867 was not
followed bv secession and the disruption OF the
Austrian Empire. In like manner an lrlsh
Parliament does not necessarily imply Sc
cession and disruption.3 If Scparatlst policy De
an inference not wholly illogical, 1t Is because
Irish hatred of England is a fact that cannot be
controvcrted But that hatred does not IN our
Judgment preclude n legitimate poltical
movement in favor of legislative independence
Mr. Parnell's attitude is not revolutionary lie
is conducting political agitation with persist
encc and earnestness, and at present is keeping
if within the lines of constitutional action.
He is striving to strengthen the Irish party SO
that it may hold the balance OF power between
the English parties. That is the legitimate ehd
of a constitutional struggle and II the Eh3Hsh
parties in an emergency were to adopC INC
suggestion Of the London press and attempt 10
leave Irish votes out of account IN question ol
confidence they would be defeating con-
situtional agitation in an unconstitutional way
If Mr. Parneu can avoid in future the fatal I'M
putation of making use of criminal agencies, he
will have a strong cause, and possibly, rs he
SAYS, winning one. But whether he wins or
loses, he will prejudice the better part OF
mankind against that cause, if he countenances
crime, or noglccts to denounce it, or aSsalls
those who are systematically supprcasing It,
Americans ought to set their faces stcrnIy
against any attempt on the part OF adopted CIT
;,o,,s Of T,isb hirtb tocnbrOi them with Great
Britain. That is a National duty. But a
political agitation in favor of an Irish Lcgsla-
ture if kept within the lines of constitutional
action, and untanted with crime, does not
concern them That is a question which Eng
lishmen and Irishmcn must settle for thom-
selves.