The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-06-26


ent controversy. He admitted the difficulty of
all fully embracing, quickly, the many aspects
of such a large question. But, on the other
hand, there had been much unnecessary and
pretended difficulty imported into the contro-
versy, as well as much honest difficulty attend
ing it. From the latter the government had
suffered some heavy losses. Or all those losses
mono gave him acuter pain than the loss of John
Bright Although Mr.. Bright's conscience had
led him to place himself in opposition to the SEN
timents of the ration on this question, he had
shown no eagercess to be first in the ranks
of the dissidents. Cheers. OF course,
the governments opponents would not now let
Mr. Bright alone. He was too valuable man.
Hence people had seen Mr.. Bright giving Mr..
Caine testimonial of character, and Mr.. Caine
had already dep,orably misrepresented this tes-
timonial, just as he had the Liberal party which
elected him but recently to the House of Com
mons. This testimonial made it appear that Mr..
Gladstone had once condemned the principle of
home rule Mr.. Bright knew that Mr.. Gladstone
had never condemned the principle of home rule
However, the audience would hear no criticism
of John Bright from Mr. Gladstone. II have
taken a resolution" said the speaker, "never to
be Mr.. Bright's critic. ICheers. 1 never
will utter word to disparage the
man whose integrity / revere, whose character
love, and who has conferred upon his country
services which cannot be forgotten" Chcersl
They had lost, he continued, many of the
Liberal upper ten, but they were the minority.
The seceders were the eleven in the division, but
how many would there be after the election?
Notwithstanding the seceders, he had no reason
to be ashamed of the present Cabinet; but his
main reliance was on the nation. and the signs
crowdlng upon each otEer daily convinced him
that reliance would not be in vain. Cheers.
playing such confidence in the working of the
British Parliament as to be content to leave all
the imperial interests in the hands of Parlia-
ment. But there was no doubt that England
and Scotland had shown the strongest
desire that Ireland should not be
severed from imperial concerns. He would
remind them that the government had
promised two things The bill itself provided
for certain contingency. Besides that, the
government had undertaken that the fiscal inter
ests of Ireland should not be affected without
giving the Irish members an opportunity of be-
ing heard; 1t had also undertaken to propose
plan to recognize permanently the concern of
Ireland in the transaction of imperial affairs
distinct from Irish affairs.
Regarding the land purchase bill, Mr.. Glad
stone reminded his audience that there was ope
rating in Ireland at the present moment, at the
expense of the British taxpayer, who seemed
unaware thereof, system of land purchase
whereby millions of pounds were lost. He
again challenged Mr.. Chamberlain to produce
his marvellous land scheme, by the side of
which the government scheme dwindles into in
significance. There could be n doubt that the
country. and also the landlords, received with
disfavor the government purchase scheme. The
land purchase bill ought to be consid-
cred as a forming SO many clauses Of
the bill. 1t was not the end of
the scheme. but part of its machinery. The
Even if rejected by the people it would be the
duty of the government to review and recon
struct tho bill upon the principle they have
already laid down. The government remained
immovable upon the principle of giving Ireland
an effective government by Irishmen lCheers
AS regarded Lord Hartingtons four conditions
no would not be party to the condition
that the Irish representation in London
remain just as it now is; he would not quarrel
over the condition that powers be delegated, not
surrendered; but he objected to the third condi-
ton, that the Dublin Parliament only have
power over certain Irish affairs He also objected
to the fourth condition, that England retain the
administration of justice He would certainly
not reIuSe TO the irish the control or their police
which right every municipality enjoys. They
must therefore not accept Hartington's four con-
ditions.
He again challenged Earl Carnarvon to di-
vulge what he said to Mr.. Parnell, and whether
he informed Lord Salisbury of the interview.
He lG!adstoncl firmly believed that Earl Car
narvon did inform Lord Salisbury. He had been
at some pains to get at the bottom of the matter,
and did not intend to desist. Loud cheers The
country had right to be informed on that sub
ject.
In conclusion, he said that the Irish demands
were reasonable and moderate, and that their
opponents had been ungenerous. After the Irish
bills had been fettered with safeguards to salts
fy their opponents, the latter taunted the GOV
ernment with mistrusting the legislature they
were calling into existence. 1t was not mistrust
on the part OF the government, but mistrust on
the part of their opponents that caused the
safeguards to be introduced. The history Of the
past, as we'll as hopes for the future, were, dur
ing this great controversy, wholly on the side of
the government The examples Of other coun-
tries in Europe showed the wisdom of the gov
ernments policy. He appealed TO the men of
Manchester, who are ever in the forefront of
progressive movements. to keep true to their ira
ditions. Loud cheers Not even their oppo-
nents believed that they could prevent the grant
ing of home rule to Ireland All they could do
was to cause delay until home rule was extorted
from them.
Mr. Gladstone resumed his seat amidst pro-
longed cheering.
Talk of the Other Campaisners