The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-04-27

CuI0 Il uIliOiA VI TIE klngQom, but 70 pur-
chase separation. Chamberlain then
went on TO say that the land proposals,
although they had been modified since
he had left the Cabinet, would still i'm
pose a great burden on Great Britain
without sufficient security for the loans
advanced. The bill was calculated. not
50 much to benefit the tenants. as to
serve as a sop to the landlords. Although
only ESQ, 900, 600 was to be issued. option
to sell was offered to landowners holding
land valued at G15O,O 900. Supposing
that the full number of options to sell
should be accepted, how would all the
money be provided? He opposed the
bill on principle, because it specially pro-
tected landlords. If the Irish Parlia-
ment was to be intrusted with the pro-
lection OF the commercial classes and the
maintenance OF social order, why could
it not be trusted to protect landlords
The Government was thrusting on Ire
land a burden which no Irish member
| could declare to be fair price to give for
the landlords rights. (Cheers) The
Irish people would regard the bargain as
one imposed by foreign country and
would be justified in taking the first OPP
pOrtunity to repudiate it. If the bargain
should be repudiated, how could it be
enforced? The Government could not
disregard the risk to British taxpayers.
Under the increasing depression in trade
hundreds of thousands of hard workers
in England would probably be thrown
| out of employment. While refusing to
assist the deserving crofters in Scotland
and postponing the claims of English
| iaborers, could the Government consist
| emily grant large sums for the benefit of
| the Irish peasantry? In conclusion, Mr.
| Chamberlain said he was not an irrecon-
cilable opponent of Gladstone's policy
If the land proposals should be suffi-
| GENTLY modified he would be happy to
be relieved of the duty of continuing his
| present attitude of opposition.
Parnell said that not having had Mr..
| Chamberlain's advantage of Cabinet
seat, he was not prepared to express a
confident opinion upon the merits and
| dement's of the scheme until he had
seen the provisions of the bill. Cham
berlain had spoken in deservedly COM
| plimentary terms of navitt, and had ex-
pressed desire to know the latter's
opinion of the Land Purchase Bill,
| Parnell assured Chamberlain that
! Davitt would not act from motives of
personal spite or jealousy (Parnellite
! cheers, but solely out OF regard for Ire
land. To the speaker it appeared that
| the appointment of a Receiver General
was unnecessary and absurd, because,
according to the promised statement,
the receipts from customs and excise
duties in Ireland will amount to within
ego, 900 of the total amount payable by
Ireland to the Imperial exchequer.
| Would it not be a sufficient security ii
| England took lien upon the revenue
collected by Irish authority, in the event
of the customs failing to yield sum
sufficient to meet the Imperial charges
| The appointment of Receiver General
would be most offensive to Ireland, be-
cause it would show a reluctance to trust
| Irishmen, even for such a small sum
as 100000. The object of the Irish
members was not to make the measure
a party question, but, by yielding as
much as possible, to settle once for al
this troublesome and dangerous matter
If the Irish landlords threw out the
measure, he hoped the offer to assist
them with English credit would not be
renewed, but that the bill for the Gov
eminent of Ireland would be pressed
forward by itself.
The bill was read first time and the
second reading was fixed for May 18th
France a., ward Islands.
a'---A'iVlces rom state that -.
! me French Admiral Nj; ~.JIId