The Irish standard., 1886-05-22

that it alluded to a hazardous change in
the constitution of the realm rendered
it necessary to speak out. Sir John
Parnell objected 10 the address as con-
tanning a proposition which, though
veiled under the captivating appear
ance Of merely adding strength and Sc
curity to the empire. represented the
annihilation of the Irish Parliament as
expedient for the general interest. lie
would not tamely allow such an idea to
receive appreciation by a side wind. AS
far as he could judge OF the scheme
from what he already knew of it, he
believed it to be adverse to the perman-
ent interest of ireland and inconsistent
with the rights OF the people-rights
which, having been delegated to the
patriotic care of the Parliament, ought
not to be resigned or surrendered by a
representative body" Sir John was
followed by Mr.. George Ponsonby, who
opposed in the strongest terms the idea
Of a legislative union as scheme that
would injure the prosperity and destroy
the liberties of Ireland. He denied the
competency of the Legislature to adopt
a measure invasive of the rights Of the
people aid subversive Of the constitu-
tion. Mr.. Darlington, in declaim1ng
against the union, is reported to have
given way to such a freedom that he
was repeatedly called to order. He
concluded 10y expressinga a hope that
the people. forgetting all political and
religious differences, would unite to
battle the aims of unprincipled and pro-
Aigate statesmen. Mr.. l'lunkett twas
confident that the majority would
spurn a proposition which tended to de-
grade and enslaye the country. Every
unprecedented observer would see it in
it's true light, and would reprobate the
unwarrantable means to which the gov
eminent had resorted for the promotion
of an abomlnable measure. It's sup
posed advantages were very disputable
while it's disadvantages were certain.
Even If an act should pass in its favor
it would be mere nullity, and no man
in ireland would be bound to obey it.
If the constitution should be much less
altered than it would be by a conjunc-
t,lre of the two legislatures, the repre-
sentative trust would be violated, and
the people in the sanctuary of whose
will the Parliament was enshrined
might resume their original rights.
This was not an unauthorized sugges-
ton, but was 81 doctrine which might be
found in the records of the reyolution.>
Mr.. Ogle declared that F'le would re-
sign lis seat rather thai, vote for "a
union against the instructions Of those
who had deputed hum to Parliament.
He approved the constitution of 1882,
and would not consent to It's surrender.
He protested that if the new scheme
should not find an early grave in the
spirit, the honor and the integrity OF
the Irish Parliament, he would oppose
it in all stages with inhexible persever-
ance." Mr.. Hardy ''censured the pro-
posal Of union as illiberal, base and
wicked; condemned the political chem
istry Of those who, endeavoring to ex-.
tract deadly poison from the fairest
and most healthy subjects, could see
nothing in the freedom acquired in 1882
but the power ofsurrenderingit in 179e.
He denied the competency of the Par
lament to give sanction to an act SO
glaringly unconstitutional; and declar-
ed that he could only foresee misery
and servitude from the completion of
the scheme now recommended. MIR.
Cory, who had become finance minis
ter in theroo Of Sir John Parnell, who
relinquished Office rather than support
Castlereagh, angled for votes by argu-
ing that if the House by it's address
agreed to take the royal speech into
consideration, no member would be
pledged to a particular opinion or de-
cision upon any Of the subjects which
it mentioned. But notwithstanding
the latitude thus allowed, the address
passed by a majority Of 2, there being
107 votes for the 105 against agreement.
When the result was make known, it
was hailed as practically victory for
the anti-unionists, and Dublin re-
sounded with acclamations. Two days
afterwards, when the address was re-
ported, the struggle was renewed by
Sir Lawrence Parsons, who strongly op-
posed the proposition. "Let," he said,
'the scandalous and irritating measure
be relinquished, and let the country,
painting from its recent struggle and
presentarms, repose at last in tranquil
lity.' Lord Castlereagh followed in
support OF The measure, and denounced
French principles with all the saer-
gy Of his nature. Mr.. George Ponson-s
by replied. In the course of his speech
he asked, referring to Castlereagh, ''if
the House was to submit to the impn-
tation of party spirit from young man
who had nothing to shield him from
their contempt but the ofic which he
abused Sir John Parnell thought it
degrading to the Parliament to enter