The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1886-06-09
GLADSTONE DEFEATED.
The ROms-Ruls Bill Beaten by Thirty Votes
on Second Reading.
GOschen Speaks in OppOsitiOn-The Vote
Results 31I for to 341 Against-Parlia-
ment Adjourns Until Thursday-A
Cabinet Meeting to be Held
To-Day.

the House of Commons at 400 o'clock this
AFTERNOON, and proceeded straight to his seat.
When his presence was noticed he was greet
ed with tremendous cheering. The Premier
wore white rose in his lapel. The House
of Commons was crowded to its utmost ca
pacity at the hour of opening the session.
Right Hon. George J. Goschen (Liberal)
resumed the de bate on the Home Rule bill.
lie said the bill was to be message of peace
to Ireland, which the Premier said would be
torn to fragments forthwith after its second
reading. The sovereignty of the Imperial
Parliament depended on a clause which it
was highly probable the majority of the
House would never consent to. If the bill
passed tremendous struggle would be in
augurated by the Catholic clergy of Ireland
for the control of education in that country.
! Regarding the question whether the bill
would prove to be final settlement of the
| Irish difficulty or lead to everlasting separa-
/ ton, Mr.. Goschen said he did not think it
would prove finality. That would depend
entirely upon the assurances given by Irish
members. The Premier at one time was
supposed to have given a pledge to recon-
| nantly repudiated that assumption.
Mr. Gladstone (interruptng)-Th is a
| gross error. What the gentleman thinks
looked like indignation was a cool state
| ment that l had resolved to reconstruct the
| bill.
Mr.. Goschen. resuming, said he saw dis
tinction, but was unable 10 see how the Pre-.
meir could avoid the difficulty. The
| House was now informed that
/ the bill was not to be
reconstructed. [Cries, Oh, Oh, and cheers,
amidst which Mr. Gladstone expressed signs
| of dissent Was the Government going to
stand by the bill or not? Loud opposition
| cheers. This state of doubt came from
voting, not on the bill, but on explanations
first given at the Foreign Office and ampli-
fed and explained away on the Friday fol-
| lowing.
1t has been shown that the British Parlia-
| meat is not inclined to consider Parnell it's
| dictator. Loud chez rs. During recess ="
said Mr.. GOschen, 81 heard one (n0w a
| minister of the Crown say he was certain
/ Parnell would be the dictator in the coming
session. think, however, Parnelps follow
ers will now acknowledge that there are
| limits whereat they see many who were pre-
| pared to graft some legislative autonomy to
Ireland would draw the line.
Continuing, Mr.. Goschen said: The pres
enCe of Irish members of Westminster is in
| compatible with separate Irish Parliament.
| 1t will be impossible to include Ulster in the
| Dublin Parliament. Parnellite cries "N0,
/ no. The clauses relating to taxation and
| finance, also continued GOschen, are ''inher-
ent defects in the bill.n He asked if the
/ Home Rule bill was inseparably tied up with
| the land purchase scheme. [Oh, oh, cheers. !
He had seen some correspondence
in. which vhd The. the sa Premier Tu.o stated
IN the minds OF the Government. At the
moment the word inseparable did not con-
/ vey anything clear or definite. The speaker
was entitled to know whether, if the Home
! Rule bill is returned in the autumn it will
be accompanied by the land purchase bill,
| Whereto it had been said to be insep parably
tied. No hope has been rendered that clause
| "a will be dropped. This meant the
disappearance permanently of the Irish
| members from the Imperial Parliament. The
| Premier said that the foreign Office
/ saw a way to adjust the difficulty, but never
| said what that plan was. Ii the House was
to hear it, it would be only before the con-
| clusion of the debate, when they would not
/ have time carefully to consider it. lCheers. ]
/ This is important, as the plan intended to
/ affect votes. Irish representation in the
| House of Commons led directly to the
| question of sovereignty of Parliament,
which,. if not destroyed, would
| be impaired and weakened. He
was unable to see what protection will
be given to minorities. He did not believe
the protestants would be prosecuted. He
| believed the Irish members were sincerely
anxious 10 prevent the clerical ascendency
aimed at Irish cries of mo, nO''] by the
| priesthood of every church. [Cheers and
cries of mo, no.'l The clergy of all
churches aimed at educational ascend
ency. The Irish members find them.
selves embarked in a tremduous strug
| gle with the Catholic priesthood.
Until now it required the Imperial Parlia-
ment's moderating influence to deter
ueme demands. They were unable to ignore
differences OF creed, class and race. A
| neutral hand was necessary to deal with the
rival sections, as in the case of the recent
difficulty in Belfast The bill contained the
! elements of commercial. financial and legis-
latIve friction. The establishment of a
separate executive would lead TO friction
and separation. Difficulties would rise
under the foreign enlistment act, and in
cases like that of the Alabama. The Impe
! rial Parliament would be responsible for the
| acts of the Irish Executive yet be powerless
to control the executive. Suppose discomfort
arose, eliminating in agitation and ultimate
| separation. The members must not forget
Morley's warning, that if discomfort arose in
| Ireland, the Irish members would place ma
terial resources at Irelands command.
| III Parliament parted with its executive
l
them bitter foes, placed the executive power
in new and untried hands, how would they
meet this difficulty?
The opponents of the bill wanted the two
countries held together. The Premier
would not admit it their duty to keep the
two countries together. Gladstone ex-
pressed dissent
He protested against the Premier's state
ment that the bill was opposed by class
and its dependents, which was described by
the newspapers as the ''swaggering class"
He did not think Chamberlain and Spurgeon
came within this description. [Cries, "Oh.
| ohP'] He said he saw his illusions created
discomfort, but the matter was important.
The Premier kindled a serious fire to get up
enough steam to pass the bill.
He urged the members not to main the
constitution, of which they were only life
trustees. No country, he said, ever had
| Parliament like the British Parliament. As
life trustees, they were bound to hand over
their glorious possession without detriment
to those coming after them. In conclusion,
he said: II implore the House by the tradi-
tion OF which We are heirs, by the obliga-
lions 9f duty and honor, by our hopes VI the