The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-02-18
Still Debating on the Queens
Speech in the
BRITISH HOUSE OF C0MM0Ns
Balfour Gets After O'Brsen and
others of that Iik-ParnelFs
Amendment Rejected.
In tho Commons.

daOatG on the ADDRESS IN reply TO tn5
Queens speech. He commented upon
the vehement character 0, O'Brien's S. re-
marks last evening, and said it was
nothing but what he was accustomed to
from the same quarter. He consoled
himself with the reflection that attacks
of even worse character had been made
against o Brien's present allies. United
Ireland had compared Trevellyan to a
skunk, cutie fish and hangman
y Brien had likewise drawn COMPARE
son between Gladstone and Judas
Iscar!ot, and for continuous weeks the
U4ited Ireland more than insinuated
that Trevellyan aud Earl Spencer con-
spired to shield men guilty of the most
horrible and nameleSS crimes.
O'Brien-I stated that the result of
Id, ir misguided action was 10 shield
those persons, but [ never alleged they
I'd so wilfully.
Balfour said he would refer to
United Ireland to prove his
statements; but in reply 10
CRIES of "quote, quote" said
he would never think OF
sr0lying his lips by repeating such Ian
guare as has been used. He denied
In toto the Allegation that Earl Carnar.
Won favored the Dublin Parliament and
opeI ed negotiations with PaInell with
the knowledge of Salisbury. Proceeding
to compare the crimes act of 1882 and
1887, B flour maintained the latter did
not, while the former did, create new
crimes. O'Brien had boosted that his
adv &C to the people of Mitchellstown
C 'mbined with the public opinion in
england, had saved the people from
who esale eviction. Government action,
BaIfour declared, had been modified by
nel ,Eer.
banour, referring to the imprison-
mert of mem bers OF the House, twitted
rreveilyan with making weak remark
to the effect thatit was sickeuing thing
or members of Parliament to De ina
pr soned. 1twas sc ieniDg thing they
should deserve it, said Balfour, and it
would be much worse if the government
had given leading violators of the law
special privileges to defy it with child
ish fuss made over their prison clio hes.
Complaint had been made of the letter
be wrote during O'Brien's impriSon-
ment. All it stated, he said, Was that
O'Brien was suffering from weak lungs
and was of an excitable disposition. Re-
garding the alleged fortunes in prisons.
~ requested tue prisod inspectors to
make special inquiry, with the resultant
report, showing 1t utterly untrue. AS
matter of fact, OBIien's health I'M
proved in prison. (Hear, hear.) He
was two pounds heavier when he lett
than wnen be went in.
'Brien-Tna5 is inaccurate; | was
i've pounds lighter.
Q Turning to the operation of thu
crimes act, Balfour commended that the
condition of Ireland was Immensely
improved, compared with the period of
e Gladstone government. What d
spectacle did the Liberals now PRESENT.
Who, a short time ago, would suppose
a single man on the opposition bench
would advocate forcible resistance to
the police? He was panied at the pro-
gress of degradation in the Liberal
Party, the members of which now rose
to the height of indignation only when
denounclng judges, magistrates and
police, who, under great difficulties,
stood between society III Ireland and
utter ruin, and fearlessly executed their
duty and they had their reward in the
respect and admiration Of every true
friend of liberty and order. prolonged
cheering
MIR. Gladstone followed Balfour. He
found little in the chief secretary's
speech that tended to assist them in
getting at the truth of the question be-
fore the House. There was a question
whether the Conservative leaders had
communicated with Parnell on the
subject of home rule. The
denials made by Baifour did
not get rid of the Irish
member s assertion S. Parnell had
stated that he had found himself in en-
tire agreement with Lord Carnarvon on
the home rule question. That had not
been denied.
Balfour, interposing, said the letter
from Carnarvon clearly implied that he
did nOtexpress an opinion upon home
rLIe.
Gladstone replied that Carnarvon
bad never explicitly denied ParnelPs
statement. Continuing, he said Liberals
were called separatlsts, because thew
wished to give effect to the national
of Ireland, while having
supreme regard for the unity of the en-
pire. Some remarks of Balfour, Glad
stone said, apparently had been levelled
at himself. His tGladstone's) Noting
ham speech had been absolutely mis-
as TO the statement regard
ing the Irish executive practice Of OBJ
tanning information by permitting
tie police to concoct crime. He protested
then as now against the practice as
dangerous to society and odious |
n itself. He had never uttered |
an expression over which he felt |
more rejoiced than his words at |
He used them for the
sake of preventing enormous Faischief |
and suffering, probably bloodshed. 1t
was agents of the law that were breakers
Of the law at Mitchellstown. 1t was
cruel, wanton, disgraceful bloodshed,
almost without example. B"lfour had
become by implication a breaker OF |
the law, for he gave the act |
his authoritative approval, as if it were
to be model rule for the conduct of the |
police. Gladstone declined to accept as
the government statistics of |
crime under the coercion act, until thu |
cases cited were thoroughly investi- |
gated. The only case given in detail has
been with point blank contra |
diction. Surprising government had |