The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-04-10
But Finds Himself Seriously Hampered BY the
/ Fact that Parliamentary Law FOrbids His
Discussing the Land Measure.
BE Points Out a Number of Objections to
Mr. Gladstone's Home-Rule Bill,
And Declares that Rather than Consent to the
Measure He Would Prefer TO Vote for Sep
aration-Hartingto Opposes the Bill.
IRISH HOME RULE.

LONDON, April 9.-The House OF Commons
was again crowded tonight. Although the at
tendance showed the intense interest that is
taken in tie progress Of the debate on the bill,
the public excitement has somewhat abated.
Mr.. Gladstone was heartily cheered when he
arose and said the debate would be continued
until Monday, when he hoped to close the dis
cussion. Ee announced that the budget would
be introduced on Tuesday and the Irish land
bill on Thursday, the latter being necessary
supplement to the homerule bill. He proposed
that the House adjourn for a weeks holiday at
Easter
Mr.. Chamberlain was received with faint
cheers upon arising to resume the debate. He
said that he rose more for the purpose Of making
personal explanation than with the object Of en-
tsring upon detailed discussion. Continuing, he
said that when he was asked to join the govern
ment he told Mr.. Gladstone that he did not
think it possible to reconcile separate Parlia-
ment at Dublin as demanded by the Irish mem
bers, with the conditions of full guarantees for
the security of the empire, and Mr.. Gladstone
informed him that all he wanted then was an in
dependent inquiry into the subject of the gov
srnment of Ireland He wrote letter to Mr..
Gladstone on January 3. In which he explained
that he could not consent to the establishment
of separate Parliament in Dublin, and it was
on that understanding that he consented to join
the Cabinet he had presumed from what Mr..
Gladstone told him, that the whole Cabinet
would discuss, step by step, in consultation, the
building of scheme of home rule not involving
separation. It was not until March IL that Mr..
Gladstone startled the Cabinet by bringing for
ward scheme involving the issue of ESQ, 000,-
600.
At this point Mr.. Gladstone reminded Mr..
Chamberlain that he had not received permits
sion of her Majestys government to reveal the
land proposals.
Mr. Chamberlain, continuing, said that he
would reserve his explanation. He did not re-
sign on the ndbill measures alone, but on the
whole scheme. Still, he asked, how could he ex-
plain his position IL his hands were tied9 [Con-
sentative cheers. He asked if he might be per-
mitted to read his letter to Mr. Gladstone.
Here an angry discussion took place between
Mr. Chamberlain and Mr. Gladstone The lat
ter declared that he could not 60 beyond the
iimits of the permission given Mr.. Chamberlain,
who thereupon complained that his explanation
would be lame and incomplete. He would never
be able to justify his conduct to the House and
TO The country. He took four principal objec
tions to the scheme for the government Of Ire
land. The first was the proposal to exclude
the Irish members from Westminsters; his Sec
ond objection was to renouncing, as proposed,
the exercise Of the right of imperial taxation;
in the third place, he objected to the surrender
Of the appointments of judges and magistrates;
and, finally, he objected to the supreme author
ty given to the Irish Parliament In matters not
specially excluded from it's authority. Since he
had left the Cabinet. he said, an important
change had been made by retaining power over
she customs and excise duties, but the proposal
now appeared utterly inconsistent with the prin-
ciple that taxation and representation should go
together. He further objected to any scheme
that laid upon the British taxpayer a tremeu-
dous liability with excessive risk, as such pro-
ject could only be looked upon as bride to mod
lily the opposition of Irish landlords to home
rule. He did not believe that the Irish people
would agree to be deprived OF all voice in the
control Of matters and policies in
which they were deeply interested.
and he asserted. that ireland was being
asked to occupy degrading position. which the
people would never accept Further, the con.
tribution which Ireland was to be called to pay
tome imperial treasury was fixed by the scheme,
and could not be increased, even in case the
United Kingdom should be placed in position
Of direst need and where, them he asked was
the integrity of the empirei The financial ques-
ton, he continued, divided itself into two parts
The English tax payer would object to any addi-
tional burden being thrown on him to make
good Irish deficiencies, and the Irish taxpayers
If there were deficiency in the budget, owing
to failure of the excise and customs duty, would
be called on to pay new taxes. failing which,
the government would be obliged to repudiate
their obligations The scheme would be accept
I'D grudginely, and in the course Of two years
there would be an attempt to revise or alter it.
As for himself, rather than face the distractions
aud complications that would arise, he would
vote for separation pure and simple Loud
cheers The opponents of the governments
scheme were told that the only alternative was
coercion That was not his alternative
The agrarian discomfort had arisen chiefly
through evictions by landlords. He would pro-
pose to deprive landlords of the power to eyict
for six months, guaranteeing them six months
rent. the land being security for the sum de-
,nanded. During this period peace commission,
composed of members OF every section repre-
scented in Parliament. could conduct an exhaust
I've inquiry into the land question. Besides
these. he looked for solution of the home-rule
matter In the direction of federation. Under
federation Ireland would remain an integral por-
tion OF the empire. The principle of federation
had been successful in Italy, Germany and
America. II would, he asserted, maintain the
imperial unity. and at the same time satisfy the
desires Of the Irish people for self-gorernment
Mr. Healy tainted Mr. Chamberlain with
using his five years Of experience to attack q
minister OF fifty years experience He ridiculed
the scheme of Mr.. Chamberlain as impractica-