St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-03-22
Britain's Premier Classes Pat
riotic Parnellites With
Irish Criminals.
Celts Who Plead for Auton-
omy Will Get Nothing
From Tories.
The House Of Lords Adopts
the Parnell Commissions
Report.
Kaiser William Entertains His
Uncle, the Heir Apparent
Of England.

LONDON. March 21.-The Marquis of
Salisbury moved in the house of lords
to-day that the report of the Parnell
commission be approved. He referred
to Mr.. O'Brien's statement before the
commission, in which he withdrew the
accusations against Lord Spencer
while viceroy, but maintained them
against his Subordinates. This form
of withdrawal, said the premier, was an
atrocious imputation on Lord Spencer,
suggesting his readiness to put on the
shoulders of his subordinates the
defamation leveled at himself. The
ParnelliteS congratulated themselves
upon being found not guilty on certain
charges: but there was evidence to show
that the Parnellites in parliament were
ready to make use of crimes COM
mitted by the Parnellites outside
of parliament. The Irish parlia-
mentary party had their hands on the
throttle valve of crime C'Hear, hear'0,
and let go or restrained criminality as
their political necessities required. How
could the country assent to committing
the government of Ireland to men thus
linked with criminality and immortality?
The commission had laid bare and in
ernors of Ireland. 1t would be pitiful
prospect if an industrious community,
especially that of the prosperous Prot
eStant section, which through
Good and Evil Report
had chung to England. were handed
over to such men. When the American
revolution was proceeding it might
have been prOphesied from the previous
record of Washington what the future
government would be and that he
would carry into the council chamber
the same high spirit of integrity that
had distinguished him in the field.
The same rule applied to this
Parnellites, whose conduct ought
to frighten the country from
admitting the possibility of ever confid-
ing to them the. rule of Ireland. Here
were men whose political objects were
Systematically pursued by means lead
ing to outrage and murder. and their
political career ought to warn the coun-
try beforehand that would be the fate
of loyal adherentS of the crown if ever
these criminal conspirators got control
of Ireland. The house owed thanks to the
commission for its impartial exposure Of
this episode in the history of Ireland.
Baron Herschell attacked the One-sided
character of Lord Salisbury's speech in
referring only to the charges on which
the Parnellites were found guilty, and
emitting mention of the grave charges
on which they were acquitted. The
government, he said, had constituted
new court, creating it by
political means, to try political
opponents, and even this court
had been constrained to clear
the Parnellities on all but charges
on which the government did not dare
to invoke the infiction of a practical
penalty. The verdict of public opinion
and when the story of the episode was
fully written on
The Pages Of History.
the praise and the blame would be
awarded IN a very different fashion
from the way in which they were
awarded by Lord Salisbury. Condem-
nation would not rest upon the ParnelI-
ties, but would concentrate upon their
accusers. Lord Kimberley said that the
whole case was pivoted upon forgeries,
and it was only Just to record
that the charges based there
on had collapsed. He thought
Lord Salisbury lacked generosity
and cruelty treated man whom he con-
sidered fit to make political alliance
with in 1885. Lord Spencer said he
would venture to say that the commits
sion would never have been appointed
but for the forgeries. The motion of
dilemma. 1t must blindly accept the
report or act as court of appeal.
The first course was an I'M
worthy one, and the second
impossible without entering into
political matters which would place
many transactions in very different
light. He could not support the motion
without also recording the great wrong
inflicted upon Mr.. Parnell. The only
remedy was to throw upon Irishmen
the responsibility of managing their
own affairs. Lord Derby denied that
the commission was unconstitutional,
and declared that it was far more fit to
deal with the matter than select COM
mittee would have been. 1t must be re-
membered, he said, that Parnell
Refused Jury Trial.
The commission had thrown upon
Irish affairs light far more agreeable
to Parnell. Lord Roseberry said that
the adoption of the motion would do a
grave luJuSllCc UOtl W IucluSClNCS dIlu
to the Parnellites. 1t was degrading to
Judges to thank them for impartiality.
The great objection to placing the re-
port on the journals of the house was that
it failed to distinguish between moral
guilt and public crime. None of
the findings of the commission were SO
serious as they appeared. If the Ma
tionalistS had used seditious language
so had the FISHERMAN, and with the
sanction of Lord Salisbury, Lord Ran
dolph Churchill and Sir Henry James.
At any rate the Parnellites had been
whitewashed by the alliance of 1885.
He severely censured the government
for Offering no PREPARATION to Mr.. Par
nell, and for taking no steps to punish
the Times. He concluded with an elo-
quent reprOach and warning to the
Irish aristoeracy, saying that all history
gave evidence that an aristocracy sep
arated from the people was doomed
aristocracy. The lord chancellor here
denied that the government had insti-
gated the charges against the Parnell-
ties. Lord Granville reproached the
government for leaving the burden of
the debate to Unionist peers, whom he
congratulated on the chivalry in defend
ing one of the least defensible acts of
the government. Lord Salisbury's mo-
ton was adopted without a division.
WALES MEETS HIS NEPHEW.