New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1886-05-11
CIADSTONE'S IRISH POLICY.
-ur prruIrRs SPEECH IN THE COMMONS.
.o>,,,r,oys UNDER WHICH DE WILL ALLc"
s,rr.rxrATloN AT WESTMINSTER - LORD
HARRINGTON Movrs THE REJECTION OF
THE BIII-CoNFERENCE OF THE

rpprsrNTATIoN AT WESTMINSTER - LORD
,p4,xiToN MOVES THE REJECTION OF
TIE BILL-CoNFERENCE OF THE
OPPOSITION LEADERS.
Ioxnoy. MAY 1O.-The crowd which assem-
,.a in the Palace yard to-day was large but IL was
nothing like the immense Assembly .n"' sa'"',u % ,1
- aav Mr. Gladstone introduced his bill Tor Home
- Tho prcmler was heartily cheered while passing
49,, ,,o Uonse of Commons Tie House was packed,
, there was no such rush on the day the Dill was III
,roauced The peers. Speakers. strangers ana iaues
c.lisr,es were filed to their utmost cap"clly'
The Premiers speech evoked no no'ao'o
demonstration from any quarter and was
horl throughout in comparative silence even the far-
neu,,cs showing no enthusiasm As an oratorca enor'
the speech was quite unequal to that IN "nion .
Gladstone introduced the bill. The 'asue"o' - s
language on tho powers the bill proposed 10 oo W
tho Anclo-Irish Commission gave eenci'i ,.,
,,on and failed TO concate the Chamberlain hauic'
$50 Chambcratn and Goschen and Lord harrington
~ q conference in the lobby, arranging ""niP u
secnre votes from all SIDES including the 1o'ernon
The supporters OF the bill are very discohteheo ' 'o
osnect OF the length Of the debate under Mr. UIau-
,ous refusal to give it day TO day consideration"
the oplnon OF lobby OF the House that II de1ea'eu'
-, ci,stone will resign aud ask for the dissolu-
,,, of Parliament, and that the Queen Will summon
Io,l Harrington TO form a new Cabinet
A. the hour for the openiGe OF the session
.,o Unrse OF Commons was crowded IN every
rt The Prince Of Wales, Prince Christian, MT.
i,holr. the United States Minister, and NJ FIoquet
President OF the French Chamber OF Deputies were
,. the visitors in the galleries. When MI Glad
ope arose ne was received with loud cheers On qnle'
-, rcstored the Premier moved the second reading OF
n Uonc Rule bill He said lie did not intend at pres
ask the House 10 continue the debate on the Dill
from day 10 day.
Mr. adstones voice at the outset OF his speech In adj
e,cv Of his motion indslinct, hoarse and feeble.
h., la1
onenins 10 make statement OF his personal posuoh'
h,cn he had entirely refraned from making when he
.rolnced the bill had at any period described
uome Rule in Ireland Incompatible with Imperial
unity fCries OF Ont Oh j That was exactly 80
hcers rne contradiction had como from some members
who visited Midlothian making speeches stuffed tun OF
totally untrue and worthless assertions lOl! on! ana
n4ersl In 1871 he had expressed the great sasiac'
zion with which he had heard statements OF the sup
poers Of Home Rule. those statements conte mpated
,ohinc leading 10 a severance OF the Empire lParnel
ite chcerSl
Two qres,ions always presented Themselves to his
mind re.arding Home Rule Firstly 1t must be shown
that il was desired by the great mass OF the population
of Ireland. That condition had never been "osouteiy
and unequivocally present until the passing OF the
Represent alton OF the People Act tCheers.l
seeondy-Wa- Home Rule compatible with the unity OF
the Empirei That question had been answered by Mr
Parnell who had declared that what he sought under
o Ii
land.
The speaker had been charged with ex-
nermenting in politics without grave
rau.e Here they had the gravest OF
causes for they dealing with people ana country
whose radical sympathes were against law especially
criminal law, which had never oDtalned the con-
adenee or the obedience Of the Irish people Al
,ornative coercion and reform measures had been
tried They had equally failed to conciiiate.
The medicine OF coercion especially had been the medi-
eine continually applied IN increasing doses ana win
diminishing results [Parnellite cheers.l Here the
sneaker reviewed the history Of the past In an endeaVor
TO prove that only thorough measure whcn "oua 10
satisfactory TO Ireland was now feasible.
srcards the autonomy OF Ireland being amenace to
the unity OF the Empr he reminded the iouse that the
same argument was employed against Canadian lhae-
pendepce When it determined TO
,oncede Home Rule TO Canada. canada
was in the precise temper attributed to
ireland today Canada did not get Home Rnlc because
she Wa loval and frienty She now loyal and
friendly because she got Home Rule. irish cheers J
He ilaistone) sat in Parliament during tho whoie
Canadian controversy. taking as young man, an acVe
part IN the discussion. What was the nature OF the
Canadian debstei The of Canada was not parallel
10 the case OF Ireland Opposition cheers mot III every
particular SO bill offered to ireland Is different In
inportaut details from the acts which disposed
OF tie case OF Canata But although not
parallel their positions analogous What was the
issue IN the case CAnsdal Government from Downing
Street These words embrace tue whole controversy
government from Downing Street meaning. or course
government from Westminster. Hear! hear What was
the cry OF those who resisted autonomy In Canadaf 1t
was the cry which slept long time acquiring vigor
from sleeping. 1t was tho cry that the UNITY OF the
Empire woud endangered. In his opinion OF the rel
tos Of Canada England them there was very great
danger to unity OF the Empires but 1t was the remedy
for the mischief, the mischief Itself, which was
lad dang
the cases of Ireland and Canada are precisely parallel
There is danger the unity OF the Empire IN the pres
ent reatons with ireland. But the opponents Oh the
bill have applied OF danger to the remedy instead
Of 10 the ex sting mischief (Cheers In those days the
people Of Canada habituay denounced IN TINS
house as rebels Prolonged Government and Parnele
cheers
Some OF those so-called rebels were Prote'tants Of
English aud Scotch birth. but the majority were Catho'
lies OF French extraction Was the cry against them
raised because they Catholics Of French eftrac
ton I No. sir The English In Upper Canada dld OK
acty the same thing. Both rebeed He Gladstone
remembered OConnell in the OF the debate Oh
Canada, in referring the French Canadian leader
Papueau saying: This is just the case o' reahn
with this difference. The Canadian agitator hds " l"
the instead OF al the beginning i-uEn
ter The Canadian rebels were suppressed but al th
moment O, military victory the political difficulty begai
the vctOrs the vanquished. III we were I'M
military victors the Canadians were victorious III th
field OF reason. ICheers.l
Here NJ Gladstone referred TO the significant expires
sion OF opinlon that mad come the Atlantic ap
proving the vital principles of the bill Cheers and de
rlsive cresl lie asked the gentlemen who appeared Il
think that thess OF opinion OF Americ
we're worthless-H Heart Hear !lf they would have con
sldered them worthless If the manifestations had
demned the bill iCheersl
Coming to the leading objections to the bin he said IN
noticed that the the objection to the exclusion
q, Irish members from the Imperial Parliament
breach OF the cardinal principle that there oush, not
be taxation without representation. The opponents
tho bill said that England could never enforc' ta1auo
I'm Ireland without sentation and that nothing bu
the consent of Ireland would induce them to coniem
plate such action for IL moment. Many members wer
not even satisfied with the consent OF ireland Beside
is general constitutional objection there existed regrc
that there would to be symbocai represehtauo
OF The uitv of the empre through the absence OF ris