The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-07-25
D0GGED BY DETECTIVES.
AN AMERICAN CLERK OF COURT
SHADOWED IN IRELAND

! He Lodges a Complaint With the
Authorities at QueenstOWn-Labou-
chere Denounces the London Times
and the Government in Connection
With the Inquiry.
| QUEENSTOWN, July 24.-Mr. O'Connell,
chief clerk of the New York court of COM
mon pleas has lodged a complaint with the
authorities here in which he says his steps
are constantly dogged by detectives, and he
asked to be relieved of this unwarranted
surveillance. He alleges that since his ar
rival he has visited religious and charitable
institutions in Cork, and everywhere he has
gone detectives have shadowed him.
POOR OPINIONS OF THE TIMES.
! LONDON, July tin the house of COM
mons tonight Mr.. Labouchere resumed the
debate on the commission bill. He said he
had as low an opinion Of the Times as most
people could have, but not so low as that of
Mr.. Matthews who seemed to think the
Times would plead the right of privilege
| respecting certain letter on the
ground that the letter had not been
published in the Times, but only read by
Mr., Webster, the attorney general. in court
| during the recent trial of O'DOnnell. The
! commission, he said, was not as good a
tribunal upon these matters as parliament.
| No three judges on the bench could so well
adiudicate these questions as the house of
| commons.
DANGEROUS POWER.
The commission had power to indemnify
any rutfian.w would crminate himself,
| provided he was accommodating enough to
! incrimnate some one else 1t was a fishing
commission, intending to evade the real
issue to be decided. Circumstances showed,
for instance, that Messrs. Egan and O'Brien
could not appear; yet in their
| absence the commission was to investigate
their conduct and listen to charges while
| these gentlemen had no snffic ent chance to
rebut adverse testimony. Mr.. Matthews
had said that the widened scope of the in
quiry might reveal some undiscovered mur-
der
| INSINUATIONS OF MURDER.
Did that mean that the members of par
lament against whom the bill was directed
were murderers. ["Hearl hearr1 Would
the house tolerate these vague insinuatio tions9
Could they suffer the commission to begin
the inquiry without the usual safeguards
for the accuSed9 Never was the effrontery
of the government SO complete as when
they said the commission was granted at the
request of the Parnellites, while in the
meantime the government was arranging
with the Times what sort of commission
should be propOs d, and what ought to be
the scope of the inquiry.
THE BILL FRAMED BY THE TIMES.
The commission bill was actually framed
by the Times and promoted by the govern
ment in order to divert attention from mis-
chievous proceedings in Ireland. The OPP
position wanted an inquiry, but 1t was into
the conduct OF the government. They
wanted to know about the murders at Mitch
ellstown. and about the murder of Mr. Man
deville Hear, hear] He proposed
moving that the commission bill receive its
second reading that day six months hence,
but Mr. Parnell was anxious to come before
any tribunal and urged him to withdraw
the motion. He (Alr. Labouchere) had no
hope of gettiug the bill altered in commit
tee, but on third reading it would be
seriously considered whether the opposition
ought to allow Mr.. Parnell to walk into the
trap which had been set for him. [Cheers.)
CHAMBERLAIN's CONFIDENCE.
Mr.. Chamberlain said that Mr. Labouch-
ere had developed his wOnted cynical vein
in imputng to his political opponents mean
and unworthy motives. Many members
were now incredulous and tne charges
against Mr.. Parnell still deserved the
fullest inquiry. He himself had sat beside
and cooperatel with Mr.. Parnell and had
formed an opinion of Mr.. Palnell's
character for honesty, sincerity and
patiotism which would make him slow to
accept the charges against him. He had
been active IN securing the release of Mr..
Parnell from Kilmainham jail. The only
thing that could shake his confidence was
Mr.. Parnells reluctance to face the
charges. [Cheers and shouts of "No.n1 Mr..
Parnell felt that he could not trust an
English jury. That distrn5t was not shared
by an English or Scotch member. An
h, a.
If not, Mr.. Parnell could have gone before
a Dublin jury. Hear! Haarl 1t was sur
prising that he aid not do so. 1t was more
surprising that the Parnelites sought TO
curtail and hamper the inquiry. This was
an extraordinary judicial proceeding
BAD USE OF RESTRICTION.
If it was restricted it might be used to
shield guilty parties. Mr.. Parnell and his
friends were charged with completely with
great crimes. How were they goiug to
show themselves innocent unl less the inquiry
covered the relations between tho members
Of the house of commons and persons out
side who were accused of crime. Regard
ing the statement that it was nee
essary 10 formulate definite charges
ag inst the Parnellites, he said that
specific charges would be made, the govern
ment being party to the indictment, and
whatever the Parnellites might say in the
heat Of debate. he did not believe that they
thought the government party to the ac-
cusatlons of the Times. [Cries Of "Oh, OH, ,"
and "you, too.nl The Parneites,
Mr.. Chamberlain continued, ought not
to grudge prolonged inquiry to brig out
the truth. 1t would be an expensive under
taking but in the event of conclusive judy
ment the government ought - allow a
reasonable part Of the expenses of the sue
cessful party TO be paid by the nation.
Hear, hear.l
EVASION BY THE GOVERNMENT.
Sir William Harcourt held that in defense
of the bill offered In behalf of the govern
ment there wa, the least possible reference
10 tho letters which were the occasion for
demauding an inquiry. The government
evoled the question in regard TO these letters,
and tried under cover of an inquiry 30 maze
an attack upon their political opponents. n
the judges were ~ act ON jldlc0l principles
in conducting the inquiry the charges must
be specific. II 10 was a judicial tribunal,
. who were 10 be arraigned and what were
the accusations they were required 10 mceti
II Sir Richard Webster believed one single
charge that be tried 10 ilx upon Mr. Pnr-
nell an counsel for the Times, il was his
duty as attorney for the crown 10 indict
Mr. Parnell, [Hear hearl
PROOF on HIS DISBELfEF.
? Proof that he did not believe the charges
wss fonnd Ia the fact that he had not
advised the government 20 risk prosecution.