The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-04-17
whi'sh would be lplitd to any pur.
posA until e6,O0OO . was paid iLt1
rHE ESeLIsr ErczrouER.

I
contribution for irmy, navy, nationa
debt aud imperial civil changes, wa
e2,0S5,000 pounis. What did En-
gland do with 1t. As an instance, shI
sent 26, 600 men b Ireland and KEEP
them there at an annual cost of G3,
100000, e9l5,00 more than tn,
balance mentioned. That wa
a specimen of the economy o.
the system the speaker wanted Il
root up. Mr.. Gladstone commended
the scheme TO thestrict, jealous, care
full, unbiased examination of English
men. He was convinced il could bt
recogniz sd as fitting part OF the grea
suspicious effort h sustain the planI
of the British Legilsture for the wei
fare Of what had ong been, and, tbs
speaker hoped, void ever be, undel
circumstances far iappier than here
tofore, an integral nlt Of her msjesty'l
domain. Mr.. Gladtgne spoke Tor an
hour and thirty five minutes, and con
cluded amid great applause.
Mr.. Gladstone's proposals do moi
imply new issue Of G180, ,000,0 in
per cents, but d only 100000, COG
from the E180,C00,O0 in new 3 pei
cents slre ady authGizsd.
MR.. CHAMBKRnIN's SPEECH.
Following Mr.. Gldetone, Mr.. Cham.
berlain read the Letter which J sent
to Mr.. Gladstone i,ndering his resig.
nation as memtsr OF the Cabinet.
In the letter Mr.. chamberlain stated
that Mr.. Gledstoe's policy would
throw heavy burden on Great
Britain, eniailing n enormous addi-
tion to the nstiona debt and probably
an immediate increase OF taxation, not
to sscure the 'uHon of the King.
dom, but to purchase sepai alton. Mr..
Chamberlain then vent Oh to say that
the land proposals, although they had
been modified sine he Rad left the
Cabinet, would still impose q great bur
den on Great Britain without sufficient
security for the loans advanced.
The bill was cslcul.ted not 80 much
to benefit the tenants az sop for the
landlords. Although only e50,O00, 600
was to be issued, he option to sell
was offered to landlords holding land
valued at e150,0OO000. SupposiDg
that the full number of options to sell
should be accepted, low would all the
money be provided { He opposed the
bill on principle, tecause it princi-
pally protected the andlords. II the
Irish Parliament was to be intrusted
with the protection of the CONNER.
cial classes and the maintenance OF
social order, why could it no.
be trusted to protect the
landlords? The government was
putting on Ireland burden which
no Irish member could declare to be
q fair price 10 give for the landlords
right. [Cheers The Irish people
would regard the bargain as one i'm
posed by foreign country, and would
be justified in taking the FIRST oppor.
tunity TO repuGiaie it. II the bargain
should be repudia'ed how would it he
enforced? The government could not
disregard the risk to tae British tax
payer. Dsder the increasing depres-
sion in trade hundreds Of thous auds OF
hard workers in Epgland would prob.
ably be thrown out Of employment.
While refusing to assist deserving
crofters in Scotland and postpcning the
claims of the English la5orer, could
the government consistently grant
large sums sums for the benefit OF the
IRISH peasautryP Cheers In con
Mr.. Chamberlain said he was
not an iIreconcilable opponent OF Mr..
Gladstone's policy. If the land pro.
posals should be sufficiently modified
he would be happy to be relieved of
the duty of continuing his present at
tltude OF opposition.
MIR. PARNELL
said that, not having had Mr.. Cham
berlain's advantage of a Cabinet seat,
he was not prepared to express a too
confident opinion upon the merits and
dement's of the scheme until he had
seen the provisions of the bill. Mr..
Chanberla n hadspoken in deservedly
complimentary terms of Mr.. Davitt
and had expressed desire to know
the latter's opinion of the land pur-
chase bill. Mr.. Parnell assvred Mr..
Chamberlain that Mr.. Davitt would
not act from motives of personal spite
or Jealousy Parnellite cheers] but
solely out OF regard for Ireland.
To the speaker it appeared that
the appointment OF la Receivers General
was unnecessary and absurd because,
according to the Prenier's statement,
the receipts from the customs and ex-
else duties in Ireland will amount to
only 100000. Of the total amount
payable by Ireland to the Imperial
would it not be sufficient
security if England took lien upon
the revenue collected by Irish au-
,hOrity in the event of the customs
iailing to yield a sum sufficient TO
meet the imperial charges2 The ap-
Dointment Of a Receiver-Generalwould
De most offensive to Ireland, because
t would show a reluctance to trust
Irishmen even for the sum of 10000
pounds. The object of the Irish mem
Ders was not to make the measure a
party question, but by yielding as
much as possible TO settle once for all
his troublesome, difficult and danger
Jus matter. If the Irish landlords
brew out the measure he hoped the
'ffer to assist them with English
.redit would not be renewed, but that
be bill for the government of Ireland
would be pressed forward by itself.
Hear, hear
MR.. MORLEY
that the bill would be in
he members hands Monday. Per-
mission was given to introduce the
ill, and the second reading was fixed
or May 18th.
Mr.. GLADsToNE's STATEMENT
f the provisions of his Irish land bill
acked completeness and elearness,
nd evoked no enthusiasm, even the
remaining silent during its
elivery. In the course of his remarks
he Premier said: II I'm strongly i'm
ressed with the belief that it is not
ossihle for Parliament to acquire any
dequate idea of the measure except |
pom a close inspection of it." The |
i'll itself met with general acceptance |
nd this will have influence in curtail- |
lg the debate. The vagueness of Mr..
ladstone's language on the proposed
sue of 3 per cents caused a period of