The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-06-01
IN THE COMMONS.
An Exciting Debate ON the Home Rule
Question.

An Exciting Debate Oh the Home NuAe
Question.
The debate on home rule in the House of
Commons was resumed by Joseph Cham
berlain. When he arose he was greeted
with derisive cheers and howls from the
Irish members. He denied the assertion
made by Dryer Gray, that he Chamber
lain) was the author of an article on g Ma
tional Councils" published in the Fort
niqhtlu Revieeo. Gray knew very well who
the author was, and that the details of the
article were supplied from Irish sources.
SCI myself possess, said the speaker, in
controvertible and incontestible proof that
eminent Nationalist leaders have approved
the principle of national councils
Here the Parnellites uttered loud howls
and cried out, " Names, names" and the
Conservatives and Wings cheered Cham
berlain. The denunciation and cheering
quickly became an uprOar, which lasted for
several minutes. Chamberlain calmly fold
ed his arms and smiingly waited for the
tumult to subside, but refused to mention
the names called for.
On resuming, Chamberlain explained at
great length why he deemed Gladstone's
concessions inadequate. "Those who OPP
pose the home rule measure he said, "be-
heve that it would prove most mlschlevous
in effect upon Ireland, and postpone for
long time a satisfactory settlement of the
Irish question: Cries of Hear! Question:
''There has been in some Liberal quarters
a desire to minimize the Importance OF the
division from the second reading of the
bill. The members have been told that the
bill is already dead" The speaker did not
believe that Gladstone would accept the
vote on the second reading, on the under
standing that it be received only as the ap-
proval of the abstract resolution that Ireland
ought to have a Parliament OF her own.
Had the Government submitted mere res
olution affirming the principle of the legis-
iative autonomy for Ireland, he (Chamber-
lain) could vote for it, because it would not
be inconsistent either with the Creation
Chamber, like the Grattan Parliament, or
the establishment of the legislative council,
such as the speaker suggested, and which,
ere now, had received the support OF the
Nationalist. TCries from the Parnellites
for Names" "names. The Govern
ment's proposal, however, had stronger
meaning than that of a mere abstract reso-
luton, in that it pledged the House to the
support of the principle of the Home Rule
bill, from which Gladstone said he would
never depart.
Concerning the feature of Irish represen-
tation at Westminster, those who agreed
with the speaker did not wish to reduce
| Ireland to the condition OF sen-goVernng
colony, and the changes promised by Glad,
stone would not meet the views of those
who maintained this position. Under the
amended proposal of the Premier, the Irist
members might be invited to take part II
discussion and vote on imperial questions
like those of Russian and Egyptian wars
Questions relating to such matters wer
constantly arising, and in order to take al
effective part in their discussion and settle
ment, the Irish members would be required
to be constantly present at Westminster
It would be impossible to make the Hous
of Commons auctuating body, as it woul'
be under Gladstone's proposals. 1t woul'
be equally unwise to create an Irish Parha
ment as a subordinate and not co-ordinat
body. rCheers.1 What they wanted wa
to prevent the Irish members from becom
ing omnipotent either at Westminster Q
Dublin. CCheers and counter-cheers.
Abiding to the references during the de
bate to the case of Canada, Chamberlai
contended it was natural conclusion frol
what happened in Lower Canada after th
reforms of 1888, that reforms like thos
J would have to be granted to Ireland If tn
} bill carried, and furthermore, concessio
} after concession would have to be made
! Ireland until there came the ultimate d.
mand for separation. Hear, hear.