The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-02-18
BALF0UR TO THE BREACH
A WEAK ATTEMPT TO OVERCOME
O'BRIEN'S STRONG SPEECH.


by Remembering That Others Had
Been the Subject of Similar Attacks
Purposeless Human Suffering Not
Delicious Excitement to His Languid
Life.
EoNDoN, Feb. Tn the House of Com
mons this evening Mr.. Balfour, Chief Sec
retary for Ireland resumed the debate on
the address in reply to the Queens speech.
He commented upon the vehement charac-
ter of MIR. O'Brien's attack last evening, and
said that still it was nothing but what he
(Mr. Balfour is accustomed to from the
same quarter in the weekly attacks in
United Ireland. His palate for such stuff
was jaded by his having had to consume a
diet of the same kind for some time. He
had been told that he took strange
pleasure in mere purposeless human
suffering, which to his languid life
impaired delicious excitement. Laughter.
There was much more said about him in the
same strain. He consoled himself with the
reflection that attacks of even worse char
acter had been made upon Mr.. O,Brien's
present allies
SOME SEVERE COMPARISONS.
United Ireland, Mr.. Balfour said, had
compared Sir G. 0. Trevelyan to a skunk,
a cuttlefish and hangman. Mr.. O'Brien
had likewise drawn comparison between
Mr.. Gladstone and Judas Iscariot, aud for
continuous weeks United Ireland had in
Sinuated, aye, more than msinuated that Sir
Trevelyan and Earl Spencer had conspired
to shield men guilty of most horrible and
nameleSS crimes. [CrieS of Hear! hearll
Mr.. O'Brien-I never did | stated that
the result of their misguided action was to
shield those persons, but never alleged that
they did so wilfully.
Mr. Balfour said he could refer to the
words of United Ireland to prove his state
ment [Cries Of "Quote."]
Mr. Balfour replied: Certainly not"
He said he would never think
of sullying his lips by repeating such Ian
guage [cheersl as had been used toward Sir
G. o. Trevelyn and Earl Spencer in July,
1888. Blame from the source whence
such foulness proceeded, was indeed the
highest praise. [Cries of Hear" Hear. y
ALLEGATIONS REFUTED.
Referring next to the allegations that the
Earl of Carnarvon favored Dublin Par
lament and had opened negotiations with
Mr. Parnell with the knowledge of Lord
Salisbury, Mr.. Balfour quoted denials of
Lord Salisbury and the Earl of Carnarvon.
The latter. declared that he had never said
one word inconsistent with the union He
hoped the denials would satisfy
Mr.. Parnell; they would at least
satisfy Parliament. [Cheers.1 Pro
ceading to compare the crimes acts
of 1882 and 1887, Mr. Balfour maintained
that the latter did not, while the former did
create new crimes. Mr.. O'Brien had
, bOasted that his advice to the people of
MitchellstOwn, combined with portion of
public opinion in England had saved the
people from wholesale eviction. Govern
ment action, Mr.. Balfour declared, had
been modified by neither. 1t was nothing
new for the Irish party to preach resist
, ance to evictiOns. That was their settled
policy 1t had never been disavowed.
Mr.. O'Brien rose to explain that his ad-
vice to the Mitchelstown people applied to
a special case. He denied that he had in
any other instance counseled resistance to
the law.
Turning to the operation of the crimes
act Mr.. Balfour contended that the CON
dition of Ireland had immensely improved
as compared with its condition during the
period of the Gladstone government.
GLADSTONE SPEAKS.
Mr.. Gladstone followed Mr. Balfour He
said he found little in the Chief Secretary's
speech that tended to assist them in getting
at the truth of the questions before the
House. Th're was a question whether the
Conservative leaders had communicated
| with Mr. Parnell on the subject of home
rule The denials made by Mr. Balfour did
not get rid of the Irish members assertions.
Mr. Parnell had stated that he found him
self in entire agreement with Lord Carnar-
Won on the home rule question That had
been denied. [Cheers.l 1t was stated that
Lord Carnarvon spoke for himself; but he
was Viceroy of Ireland at the time for the
Conservative government which now held
that home rule in any shape meant the
separation of Ireland from the empire
Mr.. Balfour interposing said that the let
ter from LordCarnalvon clearly implied that
he did not express an opinion upon home
rule to Mr.. Parnell
Some of the remarks of Mr.. Balfour, Mr..
Gladstone said, had apparently been leveled
at himself. His (Mr. Gladstone's Noting
ham speech had been absolutely misrepreSen-
ted. As to the statement regarding the Irish
executives practice of obtaining infoTma-
tion by permitting police to concoct crime,
he protested then, as now, against the
practice asdangerous to society and odious
, in itself.
DIsGRAcEFUL BLoODsHED.
He had never uttered words over which
he felt more rejoiced than his words about
, Mitchellstown. He used; them for thessake
of preventing enormous mischief and suf
fering, probably boodshed. 1t was the
agents Of the law that were the breakers of
the law at Mitchelstown. 1t was
cruel, wanton, disgraceful bloodshed,
almost without example. Mr.. Balfour had
become by implication breaker of the law,
! for he gave the act his authoritative ap-
{ proval, as if it were to be model rule for
the conduct of the police Mr. Gladstone
declined to accept as authentic the govern
ment statistics of crime under the coercion
act until the cases cited were thoroughly in
, vestigated. The Irish nation and growing
English popular feeling was on the side of
I. home rule. To delay settlement of ques-
ton of this kind between nations was dan
gerous in the extreme. II resistance TO the
, national voice of Ireland was pushed too far,
those who now guided the mind of that
nation might lose their power and be dis
placed by ruder and more dangerous spirits.
Let the government bethink themselves
and consent TO legislate for Ireland as they
! did England and Scotland in accordance
} with the constitutionally expressed wishes
, and permanent convictions of tine people,
: and thus at last present to the world the
) blessed spectacle of truly and not nomi-
, nally united empire. LOUD cheers.]
PARNELL's AMENDMENT BEATEN.
Mr.. Parnell's amendment 10 the address
in reply 10 the Queens speech was then re-
iected by vote Of 317 30 229.
, Mr.. Balfour's speech has greatly en-
, hanced his reputation as a Parliamentary
dabater He spoke throughout without
| 4 a All. - - -.