St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-06-08

speaker in this contest of giants but
NO think thrice, is he armed who hath his
Quarrel just, (cheers) and unequal and inte
rior as l am mt many points. 1 hope l
shall not be so far behind as usual T"hear
near hWithout intending to offer any disre-
spect could not help thinking while listen
Ing 10 his speech that in all the last causes,
wherewith have seen him connected during
many years past, he was never so little effect
I've as when contending against the bill we
nope to have read a second time tonight.
lCneersl Goschen sought, Il think very
unfairly, to cast lurid light on the situation
py ms ailusion to those unhappy outrages in
Kerry. l join in the expression of contempt
Tor those cowardly, disgraceful practices. l
join him TO the fullest extent shear, hear
put neither do l say that because evictions
nave been more numerous in Kerry than in
all the rest of Munster, but when 1 denounce
outrages l denounce them in every part of
Ireland, whether in Ulster or Kerry. "Hear,
hear" Goschen certainly is free from re-
proach. He has not Joined Lord Randolph
Churchill and Chamberlain in the
use of reckless language in refer
ence to the affairs of the country
which is not their country. [Cheers. An
interference for which they had not the paltry
excuse that it was any business of theirs or
that they hsd any interest there. My col
leagues have in times past been reproached
because they have not been careful in look
ing at the effect of their language, and the
employed against them to the extent of i'm
prisonment If that doctrine of indirect
responsibility is employed against Lord
Randolph Churchill or Chamberlain Lord Ran
dolph Churchill ought to plead the excuse that
he invested in nothing and nobody but him
self so he could not expect any great import
ance to be attached to his declarations.
Cheers and laughter. While Chamberlain
might have said and said very truly that he
was absolutely ignorant of all the circum-
stances of Ireland. His celebrated projected
visit there last autumn not having come of.
he could not know what would be the effect
of his language. Cheers. However,, we
have the result now in one murder already
committed at Belfast. Mr.. Parnell wen at
length into the question of outrages in Ire
land, and was followed by Sir Michael Hicks
Beach who opposed the bill.
Mr.. Gladstone followed. On arising he
was loudly cheered.
He expressed his pleasure at having listened
to the mastery exposition, II cannot call it
less, OF the member from Cork. Loud cheers
and opposition laughter. 1 feel strong con-
viction that speeches couchea in {. tone
marked alike by sound craftsmanship and far
seeing moderation, will never fail to produce
lasting effect upon the minds and con-
victions of the people of England and
Scotland. With respect to the personal
question that has arisen between Mr. Parneil
and Sir Michael Hicks-Beach,I think it no part
of my duty TO interfere. MIR. Beach de clares
though l do not see that it has much to do
with the matter, that this is the bill of one man.
Well am amazed to hear my opponents
speak as if they had been at my elbow all day
every day throughout the winter. Cheers.
Mr.. Chamberlain could only speak within the
compass of his knowledge, and if he said
it was a bill of one man, he would
know no more about it than member oppo-
site. But, sir, long before that time the
leading details Of the bill had been matter of
nearest political friends. The noble lord
arithmetic is still more defective. A party of
335 IS, L apprehend, by SIS votes
larger than a party of $50. [Renewed
laughter. Then the right honorable gen.
tieman says that, excepting one point, the
customs and excise duties, no change was
made in the bill after it was first submitted to
the cabinet. He has no means of knowing
that if it were true, and it happens to be en-
tirely untrue. Loud laughter.
This IS q matter of great Importance
though it is one that has never been seen by
Mr.. Chamberlain. Mr.. Chamberlain took ex-
ception to certain provisions of the bill with
out being acquainted with the whole case. That
is fact. Mr.. Beach is entirely wrong also
in this one of his simple facts. Then Mr..
Beach says that announced to the house that
the bill was not to be reconstructed. I said
NOTHING OF THE KIND.
Cries of t'oh,'' "oh,'' and cheers1 I an
nounced that I had not promised that it
should be reconstructed, and there are gentle
men opposite who think it matter of
laughter, who see no distinction between
promising that the bill shall not be recon-
structed and not having promised that it
shall be reconstructed Laughterl. A person
who has promised that a bill shall
be reconstructed is bound to reconstruct
| it. Cheers. And is that true ? Liberal
! cheers.) person who has not promised is
| free to reconstruct it without promising
| cheers / N hat fhn 1ot, ob+
of the opposition has now ceased. Cheers and
| laughter. Well, sir, cannot help observing
that l was struck with an observation of
Mr.. Beach. He says that the bill will be
rejected, whatever else hrppens, by the vote
| of majority of the English and Scotch
members. Opposition cheers. And in that
| observation he was cheered by those
who teach us they are above all anxious for
the maintenance of the United Kingdom
| parliament, in which Irish members are in
all respects to be assimilated to the English
| and Scotch members. Cheers and counter
cheers. WE'LL Sir Michael talks about
dissolution and | am glad to find that upon
that point he and L are more nearly asso-
ciated than upon almost any other point in
this controversy. Loud ministerial cheers. I
| After what Mr.. Beech has said and the ac-
quaintance he has shown in the history
of the bill, and after all that was said by Mr..
| GoSchen must again refer to the exact po-
| sition in which some of the members stand
with regard to the bill. In the first
| place l take il to be absolutely be-
| You'd dispute upon broad, high parliamentary
grounds that that which is to be voted upon
tonight is the principle of the bill as distinct
from the particulars of the bill. Cheers.
What may be the principle of the bill
| grant that l have the au-
| thority to determine, but it is our duty
to give our own construction of the primer
pies of the bill. / think drew q conforma-
ton of construction from the speech of Mr.
Beach, because he himself said that this was
! bill for the purpose of establishing legis-
lative body in Ireland for management
OF Irish affairs. / apprehend it to be beyond
all question that the members voting for
the principle of the bill are entirely
and absolutely free TCheersI and
that if they think there is any set of provi-
sions by means of which better and fuller
of the bill they are at liberty to
displace all the details. TCheers.1 That does
not admit of doubt. Well, the government
have taken certain engagements. They have
taken an engagement as to location, for the
| Intervention of Irish members, to the terms
of which need not now refer. They have
also taken an engagement ON the claim of
| Ireland to continued concern through her
members in the treatment of imperial
subjects generally, and that has en-
tailed a positive pledge to reconstruct
| if we do not entirely remove the twenty
| amendments connected with it. One
more question has been raised with
| respect to other amendments. Of
course, as to the freedom of
members Eto suggest other amendments,
say nothing, but in reference to our duty
there can be no question at all that our
duty, if an interval is granted us.
| if the circumstances of the present session
require the withdrawal of the bill. 1t is to be
re-introduced with amendments at an early
date in the Autumn. of course, tits our duty
| to amend our bill with every real amendment,
every real Improvement with whatever is cal
culated to make it more effective and accept
able. (Cheers.) For the attainment of its
end we are partly free to deal with
them, but it would be the meanest
base act on the part of the government to
! pretend that they have plan of reconstruc-
ton ready before half cut and dried in their
minds at time when from the very
nature of the cause it must
| be obvious that it is perfectly clear that
there can be no such thing. [Cheers. So
much, then, for the system and freedom of
| the members opposed to the