The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1886-04-21
IRISH hOME.RULE BILL.
WHAT MR.. COLLINGS THINKS OF
The MEASURE.
Its Safeguards should Be Thorough
ly Examined Before II Is
Accepted.

LONDON, April 20.-Jesse OollingI
Liberal, the author OF the "tbTee.scrsE
and-a-cow" amendment, which de
ieated the Salisbury government, an
who has just been unseated as PaTlis
mentsry member for Ipswich, becaus
OF fraudulent electioneering purposes
publishes letter in to-day's Times, il
which he says he deprecates the &C
ceptance OF Mr.. GladstDne's bill with
out a thorough examination of tn
safeguards proposed. On this subject
Mr.. Ceilings says, hardly a ssntenC
has yet been uttered by any OF the re
spoBsible Ministers. "The main argu
ment in favor OF the home rule bill ,
said the writer, lis that there is nj
other alternative to conceding thu
Irish an Independent Parliament thar
that of coercion. This argument we
who yield to none in sympathy anC
affection for Ireland and in condemna
ton OF the present government in thai
country, absolutely decline to accept
especially at the hands OF those who
in few weeks, have not worked out
but adopted plan 10 solve q problem
which is the growth of centuries, and
who admits that authority and not rea.
con is the basis of their faith"
Mr.. Ceilings then proceeds 10 chow
that the safeguard of the proposed
double orders in the Irish Parliament
is delusive. ''The fact that this pro-
posal emanates from a respected
Premier alone preserves it from ridi-
Guile by the whole Liberal party"
Mr.. Ceilings adds that Mr.. Glad
stones original proposal contained a
surrender Of the control of the Irish
customs and excise 10 the Dublin
government and argues that in that
shape the home rule bill was RICH and
logical, because no other arrangement
could possibly be permanent. A
separate Parliament, the writer con-
tends, must demand and would be
certain to eventually secure fiscal in
dependence. The Parnellites would
be bound TO follow the popular stream
or be left behind by a new patriotic
party which would arise and demand
the abolition of those things now
looked upon as safeguards Of the in
tegrity OF the empire. Therefore"
Mr.. Ceilings goes on, 1--WE must take
it for granted that the congregated
scheme will fail, because 1t is scheme
OF separation and for a repeal Of the
union, which restrictions il would be
impossible to maintain. Those who
vote for the measure on its second |
reading without positive assurance
that Irish representation at West
minister will be retained, will vote for
virtual repsal."
The remainder of the letter is de-
voted to urging the adoption Of Mr..
federation principles
instead Of those proposed by Mr..
Gladstone. John Bright is quoted
against the dual principle in an Irish
legislature. Washington's farewell
address is referred to as powerful ar
9ument in favor of federation as OPP
posed to separation. The letter con-
,ludes as follows: 81 yield to none in
oyalty to, and admiration OF, Mr..
but do complain OF his
springing his Irish schemes upon the
country without first consulting the
Liberal party"
Ahii I'm rhOh JObhfn CHAMBERLAIN
A letter from Mr.. Joseph Chamber
ain on the difference between his
plan Of British federation and Mr..
home rule policy has been
made public by the correspondent
who received it, and is attracting at
,ention. In this letter Mr.. Chamber
ain Gays: ut is, of course, impossible
or any one except a responsible Min
ster to elaborate scheme of fedora
ion. 1t is necessary to find how far
he Welsh and Scotch, as we'll as the
English, desire decentralization. NV
des is that of provincial assemblies,
the same position as the
ocal legislatures do in the American
md Canadian States, the subjects on
which they are allowed to legislats
icing delegated to them, financial and
imperial questions remaining within
he control OF the imperial legislature
It Westminster. II Wales and Scot
and should not desire to have such
ocal legislatures that would be no
eason why the experiment of the es.
ablishmeHt Of one should not be tried
n IrelauSkN