Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1886-06-04
a home rule bill would have been intro
duced on the day the House met.

nothing about 1t.
Mr.. O'Connor replied that MIR. Bridge
man was responsible for the acts OF his
agents, with whom he still had an ac-
count To settle. Cries of "OhI'l Con-
tinuing MIR. OCOnnor said that honorable
considerations restrained him, otherwise
he could startle the House by revelations
concerning the CamSerwell elections
with reference to Mr.. Blunt, personal
friend OF Lord Randolph Churchill.
Mr.. Churchill, inteTpOsing, said he
would take 1t as favor If Mr.. O'Connor
relieved himself from the restraint.
Conservative cheers.
BLUNT's PERMISSION REQUIRED.
Mr.. Connor replied that he would re-
quire Mr.. Blunps permission before COM
plying with Lord Randolph's request.
Charles Bradlaugh supported the bill.
lie sald that the Obiectors to the details
of the measure, II they voted for second
reading, would have full opportunity to
discuss the details in committee. The
choice lay between Premier Gladstone
and coercion.
Mr.. Morley, referring to Sir Julian Gold
smidts proposal that an understanding
be arrived at on basis similar TO that
adopted in the case Of the seats bill, said
be would not object to the adoption OF
such course IL the conditions were fa-
vOrahle. But a census OF opinion was
first necessary. Did Sir Julian think that
the mOdus Vivendi was possible with an
opposition which was advocating twenty
years OF cOercionY Cheers and cries OF
mo, mop "WithdrawVl
WILLING TO WITHDRAW.
81 will withdraw the remark" re-
spOnded Mr.. Morley, 'if a single member
on the opposite bench shall disavow Lord
Salisbury's speech
Regarding the talk OF ostracsm, Mr..
Morley thought the supporters OF the
government had the most right to COM
plain OF threats in that direction after
what bad been said lately about the long
purses with which they were 10 be fought
at the next election. Members told the
House that they were willing to affirm
the principles Of nome rule, and yet they
had decided to oppose the hill, thus de-
feating their own object. The crisis was
a grave one. The case to-day was differ
ent from that Of O'COnneIl, 10 which Lord
Huntington had referred. A great trans
formation had occurred. No longer an
alien church was in the ascendancY.
Landlords no longer had the absolute pO-
sition they formerly had. The people had
been enfranchised and were no longer
serfs. Cheers.
THE REAL DIsMEMBERMENT.
There mad been much talk of dismam-
berment. Dispersion OF the Irish across
the seas for many years was real dis
memberment. In regard TO local govern
ment, which many members were dis
posed to grant, Lord Salisbury, speaking
at Newport in 1885, argued that 1t was
impossible to ignore the advantage of
large central authority over a
merely local one. Moreover, in
Ireland, they had had pretty large
experience OF the action Of local authority.
He instanced trial by jury, and asked how
members could talk as they did OF govern
ing Ireland when the whole people were
against them, and how Lord Hartlngton's
proposed reform of the Irish adminisLra-
ton would be brought about. Regard
ing the suggestion to make Mr..
Parnell secretary for Ireland, neither
Parnell or any Of his colleagues would
accept Office. II they did they would soon
lose their whole influence with the exist
ing state OF thlngs. IRISH cheers. What
was wanted was to get hold OF those
having an interest in the system and de-
sirOus to carry on regular and orderly
method of government. 1t was his opinion
that had the country spent half the money
and attention bestowed upon Egypt and
other foreign countries Ireland would have
been a support instead OF taunt 10 US.
We had taught Ireland TO be mendicant
instead OF self-reliant by alternate bribes
and subsidies and by bolstering up the
worst land system the world had ever
seen.
THE COURSE THE GOVERNMENT HAD
CHOSEN.
It was absurd to compare ireland with
Scotland. The government had chosen to
pi Oceed with the home rule bill instead OF
resolution Affirming the principle be-
fol bnf a bG raro "A
with the plan. IL bad never expected to
succeed by one blow or TO carry the
scheme by rush. II was anxious and
willing TO consider any proposal which
did not interfere with the principle OF the
bill or substantially with the power IL
intended to confer upon the new Irish
Legislature. To vote for second read
ing of the bill, he said, was 10 vote for
the principle OF autonomous legislation
for Ireland. The government denied that
the vote could mean more than TINS, be-
cause the bill 10 oe produced In the au-
tumn might contain notifications Of GER
tain general proposals. JObn B1Rhps
letter had been referred TO, but not pub
lished.
Mr.. Chamberlain here interposed with
the remark that there was no objection
10 the publication OF Mr. BrlghVs letter
II he (Mr. Bright) consented 10 1t.
0lIstNlUIlfNg f1iibtlAilNf hHAh nc tbyhAul
that the letter had more force With Lord
HartlngtOn's meeting, because Lord
Harrington, like Mr.. Bright, objected TO
the principle Of the bill, whereas Nr.
Chamberlain acc pted the principle, but
objected 20 the plan.
THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT.
In conclusion he referred 20 Lord Sails
bury's remark about paying attention to
what people said on tneir death-beds, aud
said II was well known that sometimes
men on their death beds left their last will
and testament. This dill might be re-
garded as the last will and testament OF
the present government. The division
about 10 be taken could not be the end.
Loud cheers. Even an electoral cam
paign might not be the end.
Let not the opponents OF the bill
imagine that by driving the govern
ment from the stage the curtain would fall
on the last scene Of the NTH and hnal act
OF the Irish question. II the House re-
fused tO accept the solution now offered
II might rest assured that no other meas
ure, unless based upon the lines OF this
measure, would be carried "A single eiec-
tive stage further Loud cheers. The
debate was adjourned on motion Of Mr..
AllingwoOd.