The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-11-21
Lord Harrington Supports the Bill and
John Morley FOrcibly Opposes 1t.
Justice Hammer lntimates that the Parnell
Case Must Be Hurried to q Conclusion
Looking for a Successor to Sackyille.
John Dillon Denounces the Ashbourne h
A Warning to E~ogi.shmen.

THE IRISH LAND QUESTION.
John Dillon Denounces the Ashbourne Act
A Warning to Eogi,shmen.
LONDON. Nov. 20 On motion OF Ir. Smith,
the government leader in the House OF Com
mons, this evening, the rule requiring an ad-
journment at midnight was suspended, in order
that the debate on the land-purchase bill. ex-
tending the operation Of the Ashbourne act,
should proceed until . division was reached.
Mr.. John Dillon said he thought the time had
come to take a broad view Of the Ashbourne act.
and show the British taxpayer what advances
might be ASKED and tho nature Of the sscrrisy for
them, He hoped the debate had resulted 10
waking up tie taxpayers to the immirerce of
the danger Of finding themselves committed TO
q scheme Of landlord purchase without due
guarantees.
1t was astounding to hear tho Tories speak
with fervor about the creation of o peasant
proprietary, at the same tiEa charging
the peasants with trying to ~frustrats the meas-
ure which was directed to that end. Among
the frst principles Of the league stood the peas.
ant proprietary. aimed at procuring such al
altsrat!on 10 the law as would enable every oc-
cupier of the land TO become an owner. He said
that he had formerly spoken in favor of the
Ashbourns act, but 1t was when no coercion ex-
listed. With coercion The act was assisting the
landlords 10 raise the price OF land, while IL was
breaking MP the combinations OF the tenants.
he must warn the English people that the day
might come when the national programme would
include the reputation of liabilities under the
act. This position has been forced upon the
Irish people at the point of the
bayonst Mr.. Goschen had tried to show
that there was adequate security for ad-
vancss, because the terms OF purchase included
both the landlords and the tenants interest.
The truth was that, In hundreds of cases. the
land commission had reported that the l2nd-
lords and tenants interests together would not
afford sufficient security for the price at which
it was proposed to purchase. 1t was absurd to
cay that the existence Of arrears was not used
to raise the price Of land, and it was equally
untrue 10 deny that coercion tended to raise tho
price by crushing the power OF the tenants to
com bine. The government were trying 70 re-
duce the tenants to the unprotected position
held by them in 1879. Such a course was cruel,
6astardly, mean. Ii might infict more misery
upon the people, but they were welded 10 liber-
ty. and were prepared to mako sacrifices to
achieve IT, Cheers
Lord George Hamilton Conservative assailed
the Parnellites as opposing tho bill because they
were conscious that it would enable the peonle
to forsske the league yoke. The landlords
yoke might be heavy, but il was nothing COM
pared with the tyranny o. the league.
Major Saund.rson Conservative, said that
Mr.. Gladstone excelled in making tho best of a
bad cause and In skating on thin ice. The
members below the gapgway knew that this bill
was most popular in Ireland. It was hardly
fair in Mr.. Gladstone to advocate the relief of
arrears without telling them that these arrears
had accrued since the passage OF the act Of 1852,
which act Mr.. Gladstone pronounced the final
settlement of the land question. Mr. Gladstone
talked as IL Irish landlords lived on arrears. He
MIR. Saundsrsonl thought they much
preferred rents. With regard TO
eviction, he wonld like to ask
Scotch separatists what o s Scotch landlord would
do il he failed to obtain his rents. It was De-
cause the government had been. armed with
power to Illustrate such Reputation of liabIli-
ties Mr.. Dillon had predicted that he believed
the security offered the state was ample and
that ,hs obligations Of Irishmeu TO the state
would be Loyalty and honestly met. He object
sd to n remission of arrears because lenient land
lords would suffer while those who enforced
payment when due would escape. Further,
such q remission would cause discomfort among
tenants who honestly paid their rents.
Lord Harrington said he thought Mr.. Dillon's
argument was not very coeent against the bill.
but was very eoeens in favor OF coercion. be-
cause he lot only confessed, but boasted, that
the value Of land had been reduced from twenty
to fifteen years purchase by a combination
which rendered IL impossible for q tenant with
safety 10 take a vacant farm.
Mr.. Dillon denied that he used the words
with safety"
Lord Harrington retorted that nobody ever
followed SIR. Dillon without receiving . contra.
diction.
Mr.. Dillon holly protested.
Lord Harrington. amid great excitement, re-
suned his speech. He said he had not intended
to make any imputa,ion, but Mr. Dillon in
ments, which it would be difficult TO attain.
lie proceeded TO argue that Mr.. Dillor's language
justified everything that the government had
been forced to do in order to uphold the law in
Ireland.
The land-purchass and arrears questions were
quite distinct. The rejection of the bill
would not facilitate dealing with arrears,
the necessity for which, he thought, was much
overrated. The government never refused TO
deal with the arrears question. The delay arose
from the. difficulty in deciding as TO how to
deal with the subject. This AshboUrue act had
been q most successful experiment. Why adam
don it nowY Tbs experience thus gained would
DO invaluable when Parllment REMARKED on o
more ambitious scheme Of land purchase.
Mr. Morley made q spirited defense OF Mr..
Dillon against the remarks of Lord Harrington.
He said that Nh. D;llon's character stood as
high AS that OF any other member OF the
House. AS far as the taking Of vacant farms
WAS concerned, Mr.. Dillon relied upon the ere
alton of an esprit dn corps among the tenants.
not upon intimidation. Mr.. Morley fully sup
ported Mr.. Gladsiones contention that the ar
rears question was moro urgent than the Ash
bourne bill. which, be said, ought 10 be post
poned. The government admitted the
necessity of a settlement of the arrears question.
and. having a majority on both sides OF the
House.. must DO held responsible for not dealing
with the question. He denied that the Ash
bourne act had been such a success as Lord
Harrington had asserted. Among other reasons
in proof whereof he spoks, Mr.. Morley said that
only a sixth of the f3. 900. 600 used had been ex-
pended in the west of Ireland. He quoted arti-
cles from the Birmingham Gazette to show
that the Cham ber.ain party considered that
the extension Of the Ashbourne act would be as
dangerous as Mr.. Gla6stonss scheme; yet they
preferred to support it rather than 10 injure the
position of the governments; ''snd this Mr..
Morley exclaimed. is the party that STUN s the
country, saying that q great moral gulf divides
US. Yes. II is a great gull. and your morality
lies at the bottom lCheers.j The speaker said
bis position In reference to the land purchase
scheme was unchanged, but be did not want 70
purchase land At any price. The government
professed TO have prepared q comprehensive
schsme; why not produce it, Depend upon II,
he ea.d, II they voted this five millions they
would never See their scheme, but would vote
for al Indefinite postponement of the land act
Element question, in addition TO embarkinc on
an unsound hrAncisl policy end delay in dealing
with the arrears.
Mr.. Smith. the government leader, in defend
ing the government against the charge OF a
breach OF faith, reminded the House tina. he, IN
July last, informed them that this bill would be
introduced IN the autumn session.
The House then divided, and the second read.
inc was liked for Thursday. The Uniouists voted
solidly with the government. Two Gladstonians,
Haidane and Grey. voted against the amend
ment, and two othcrs absta ned from voting
The Gladstonian leaders did not challenge