St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-05-11
The Home Rule RilI.


opening of the session the house of COM
mons was crowded in every part. The
Prince of Wales, Prince Christian, Mr..
Phelps, the United States minister, and NJ.
FloQuet, president of the French chamber
of deputies, were among the distinguished
visitors in the galleries. When Mr.. Glad
stone arose he was received with loud
cheers. On quiet being restored the pre-
mier moved the second reading of the home
rule bill. He said he did not intend at
present to ask the house to continue the
debate on the bill from day to day.
Mr.. GladStone'S voice at the outset of his
speech in advocacy of his motion was III
distinct, hoarSe and feeble, but it cleared as
he proceeded. He said he desired at the
opening to make a statement of his per-
sonal position, which he had entirely re-
Trained from making when he introduced
the bill. He had never at any period de-
Scribed home rule in Ireland as imcompati-
BILE with imperial unity. Cries of oh, on.
That was exactlyso. Cheers. The con-
tradiction had come from some members
who visited Midlothian, making speeches
stuffed full of totally untrue and worthless
assertions. Oh, oh, and cheers. In 1871
he had expressed the great satisfaction with
which he had heard the statements Of the
supporters of home rule, as those state
ments contemplated nothing leading to the
severance of the empire. Parnellite
cheers. Two questions always presented
themselves to his mind
REGARDING HOME RULE.
FirstlY-It must be shown that it was de-
sired by the great mass of the population of
Ireland. That condition had never been alb
solutely and unequivacally present until the
passing of the representation of the peoples
act. Cheers.
Secondly-Was home rule compatible with
the unity of the empire? That question had
been answered by Mr.. Parnell, who had de-
clared that what he sought under the name
of home rule was simply the autonomy of
Ireland.
The speaker had been charged with ex-
sperimenting in politics without grave
cause. Here they had the gravest of causes,
for they are dealing with people and coun-
try whose radical sympathies were against
law. especially criminal law, which had
never obtained the confidence or the obedi-
ence OF the Irish people. Alternative CO.
ercive and reform measures had been tried.
They had equally failed to concilitate. The
medicine of coercion especially had been
the medicine continually applied in increas-
ing doses, and with diminishing results.
lParnellite cheers.
of the past in an endeavor to prove that
only thorough measure which would be
satisfactory to Ireland was now feasible.
continuing he said, as regarded the
autonomy of Ireland being menace to
the unity of the empire, he reminded the
mouse that the same argument was en-
pl0yed against Canadian Independence.
When 1t was determined to concede home
rule TO Canada she was in the precise tenn
per attributed to Ireland to-day. Canada
did not get home rule because she was
loyal and friendly. She was now loyal and
friendly because she got home rule. Irish
cheers. He (Gladstone) sat in parliament
during the
WHOLE CANADIAN CONTROVERSY,
taking as young man an active part in
the discussion. What was the nature of
the Canadian debate? The case of Canada
was not parallel to the case of Ireland.
deposition cheers. Not in every partic-
ular so. The bill offered to Ireland is diff
ferent in important details from the acts
which disposed of the case of Canada. Rnt
although not parallel. their positions are
analogous. What was the issue in the
case of the Canadian government from
Downing street? These few words en-
brace the whole controversy: Government
from Downing street meaning, of course.
government from Westminster. Hear
hear. What was the cry of those who re.
sisted authority in Canada? 1t was the crv
which has slept long time, acquiring
vigor from sleeping. 1t was the crv that
the unity of the empire would be en-
dangered. In his opinion of the relations
Of Canada and England then there was
very great danger of the unity of the en-
pire, but it was the remedy for the mis-
chief. not the mischief itself. 1t was re-.
garded as dangerous. Irish cheers. In
tlis respect the cases of Ireland and
Canada are precisely parallel. There is