New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-05-22
INCITING CIVIL VAR.

Mr.. PANEL has frequently been denounced
in Parliament for melting crime, or at least for
negecting to discounenancc it. He had his
revenge during the debate on the Arms Act.
He directed attention to Lord Randolph
Churchill's speeches in Belfast and to Lord
Salisbury's recent utterances respecting the
| Ulster Loyaists, and sententiousy remarked
that while they might not have intended to
promote the ends of murder and bloodshed,
their words certainly could have no other effect.
Mr.. Parnrll may be pardoned for keenly enjoy
ing this back thrust at the Tory leaders who
have so often accused him of indirectly irsti-
eating and proGting by murder, assassination
and agrarian crime. He succeeded with Mr..
6 ladstone's aid in placing Lord Randolph
! Churchill on his defence against the charge of
! melting the people to murder. The Tory and
| Liberal opponents of Home Rule have been
exceedingly reckless in welcoming the prospect
of civil strife and military movements in
Ulster. They have not sought to allay the
excitement prevailing there and have openly
encouraged the purchase of arms and threats
of instruction against Home Rule. Mr.. Par
nells sincerest friends in America have some
times regretted that he was not more outspoktn
in rebuking criminals who were proving them
selves the worst enemies of the Home Rule
cause. But certainly he has never instigaIed
armed resistance to the law nor glOated over
the prospect of bloodshed and the opponents
of Home Rule are now doing precisely this.
A Parliament in Dublin, if established by Mr..
| G ladstOnr, will be sanctioned by British law.
! II will be an Irish legislative body authorized
| by a direct act Of Parliament, acting under
constitutional warrants and supported by the
British Crown. A military campaign against it
in Ulster will be an insurrection against British
law. When, therefore. English statesmen
venture to justify in advance the arming of
the Ulster Loyalists against the projected Dub
lin Parliament and to encourage them to fight
for their rights if necessary, they are melting
them uLder certain contingencies to rebel
against the Crown, for that Parliament will be
one of the Crown institutions quite as much
as the present House of Commons. Such ILL
advised counsel may be accurately described as
tending directly to instigate civil strife not
only in Ireland, but in Ulster itself, where the
Nationalist and LOyalists are evenly divided.
The Protestants in Ireland have a strong plea
to make against the proposed Parliament,
where they will constitute a minority. 1t
should be patiently heard and accorded its full
weight in the argument against Home Rule
But if the decision be finally reached at West
minister that the great majority of the Irish
people must be allo owed to govern thcmselV es,
and that il would be impracticabe to separate
Ulster from the other provinces, even if there
were not as many Nationalist there as there
are Loyalists, the minority will have to submit
as mnorities do in other countries. Croatia
which is Hungary's Ireland, had its minority
that was bitterly opposed TO the creation of a
separate LEGISLATURE; but the will OF the
majority WAS considered as having supreme
force and Home Rule was granted. When the
&C was passed the Hungarian Crown was be-
hind it, and any attempts on the part of the