Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1886-05-11

In the Comm ms today Gladstone moved
the second reading of the home rule Dill
Gladstone's voice at the outset of his speech
IN advocacy of his motion was indistinct.
hoarse and feeble, but it cleared as he pro-
ceeded. He said he desired at the opening to
make statement of his personal position
which he had entirely refrained from making
when he introduced the bill He never at
any period described home rule in Ireland as
incompatible with imperial unity. rCries of
oh, oh. That was exactly so. Cheers.
Two questions always presented themselves
to his mind regarding home rule. Firstly, it
must be shown that it was desired by the
great mass OF the population of Ireland, that
the condition had never been absolutely and
unequivocally presented till the passing of
the representation act of the people Cheers
Secondly, was home rule compatible with the
unity of the empire? That question had
been answered by Parnell, who had declared
that what he sought under the name of home
rule was simply the autonomy of Ireland.
The speaker had been charged with expert
menting in politics without grave cause.
Here they had the gravest of causes, for thew
were dealing with a people and country
whose radical sympathies against u law es-
pecially the criminal law, which had never
obtained the confidence or obedience Of the
Irish people. Alternative coercive and re-
form measures had been tried They had
equally failed to concilate. Tn medicine
OF coercion especially had been the medicine
continually applied in increasing doses and
with diminishing results. [Parnellte cheers
AS regards the autonomy OF Ireland being a
menace to the unity of the empire he remind
ed the House that the same argument had
been employed against Canadian indepeud
ence when it was determined t concede home
rule to Canada. Canada was in the precise
temper attributed to Ireland today. Canada
didn't get home rule because she was loyal
and friendly. She is now loyal and friendly
because she has got home rule. Irish cheers
The case of Canads WAS not parallel to the
case of Ireland, not in every particular. So
the bill offered to Ireland is different in i'm
pOrtant details from the acts which dispossd
of the case of Canada. In his opinion 6f the
relations of Canada and England, then there
was very great danger to the unity of the
empire, but it was a remedy for mischief. not
mischief itself which was regarded as dan
| gerous. In this respect the cases of Canada
and Ireland are precisely parallel. There is
danger to the unity OF the empire in our pres
ent relations with Ireland. The opponent of
the bill have applied the cry of danger to
the remedy instead of existing mischief In
those days the people of Canada were de
nounced in this House as rebels Pro
longed government and ParDellite cheers. I
The Canadian rebels were suppressed. but at
the moment of military victory a political
difficulty began and the victors were van
quished. If we were military victors the
Canadians were victorious in the field of rea-
son. Here Gladstone referred to the signifi-
cant expression of opinion that had come
across the Atlantic approving the vital prn-
ciples of the bill.
Coming to the leading objections to the
bill he said he noticed that the first was an
objection to the exclusion of the Irish mem
bers from the imperial parliament as a breach
of cardinal principles that there ought not to
be taxation without representation. The OPP
ponents of the bill said that England could
| never enforce taxation in Ireland without
representation and that nothing but the con-
sent OF Ireland would induce them to con-
template such an action for moment.
| Many members were not satisfied with the
consent of Ireland. Irish people do not stand
in the same relation as the people of England
| and Scotland. Is it a wonder that in a coun-
| try with woes so great and whose hopes have
50 often been doomed to disappointment that
the mind of the people should be confined TO
| the position Of their own country The bill
provides that Ireland shall not be excluded
from the imperial affairs. Clause 80 pro-
vdes for recall of the representatives. in
| bolh houses of the Irish parliament before
parliament can proceed to the alteration of
the statute upon which the two countries do
not agree. Another clause provided that on
| certain conditions the Irish assembly may
vote sums of money for purpopes exclusive
| from its ordinary, cogniZance. He trusted
that should Great Britain be involved in a
great war hen Ireland would be exposed to
common danger the Irish assembly would re-
spond to message from the crowd by voting
money to prosecute the war. Though abiding
in the principal that the Irish membdrs
should not sit in the imperial parliament the
| government was willing to meet the difficulty
| by providing that when it was proposed to
alter the taxation of Ireland to customs
and excise duties the Irish members would
De enabled to appear in parliament and share
| in the debate.
| In conclusion, he declared that the main
! object of the bill was to abolish. root and
branch. the discomfort prevailing in Ireland,
and to restore social order by the removal,
not merely of the symptoms but OF the
causes of that discomfort. If opponents OF
the bill had an alternative policy, what was
1t? he asked. If Lord Randolph Churchill
should undertake to settle Ireland what did
he mean to do? Was his plan that proposed
by the loyalists in Belfast last November!
| The English government might be daring,
but not 90 daring - to undertake to recon