The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-03-22
SALISBURY AND THE IRISH.
The Premier Uses Harsh Language in
Speaking Of the Parnellires.

LONDON, March 2l.-The Marquis of
Salisbury moved in the House of Lords to-
day that the report Of the Parnell commits
sion be approved. He referred TO Mr..
O'Briens statement before the commission
in which he withdrew his accusations
against Lord Spencer while viceroy, bat
dinates. This form Of withdrawal,
said the premier, was an afro
clous imputation on Lord Spencer,
suggesting his readiness to put on tho
shoulders of his subordinates defamation
leveled at himself. The Parnellites con-
graduated themselves upon being found not
guilty on certain charges, but there was
evidence to show that the Parnellites in par
nament we're ready to make usa of crimes
committed by Parnellites outside Of par!ia-
ment.
A HARD CHARGE.
The Irish parliamentary party had their
hands on the throttle valve of crime Ihear |
hear ], and let go or restrained criminality
as their necessities required. How could
the country assent to committing the gov
ernment of Ireland 60 men thus linked with
crlminality and immortality!
The commission had laid bare and indi-
Gated the spirit of these aspiring governors
of Ireland. 1t would be a pitiful prospect
II an industrious community, especially that
Of prosperous Protestant religion, which.
through good and evil report, had clung to
England, were handed over to such men.
wAsHINGToNs HIGH CHARACTER
When the American revolution was pro-
ceeding IL might have been propheSied
from the previous record of Washington
what the future government would be, and
that he would carry into the council cham
Der the same high spirit of integrity that
had distinguished him in the field. The
same rule applied to the Parnellites whose
conduct ought TO frighten the country from
admitting the possibility of ever confiding
to them the rule of Ireland. Here wore men
whose political objects were systemati-
cally pursued by means leading to outrage
and murder, and their political career ought
to warn the country beforehand VIII IT would
be tho fate of the loyal adherents OF the
crown IL ever these criminal conspirators
got control of Ireland [Cheers1 The
House owed thanks to the commission for
its impartial exposure OF this episode in tho
history of Ireland.
SALISBURY oNE-sIDED.
Baron Herschell attacked the one-sided
character Of Lord Salisoury's speech in
referring only TO charges on which the Par
nellltes were found guilty, aud omitUIng
mention of graver charges on which they
were acquitted. The government, he said,
had constituted new court, creating 1t by
political means to try political
opponents and oven this court had
been constrained to clear the Parnellites
on all but charges on which
the government did not dare to invoke the
infection of practical penalty. The YER
dict of public opinion was on the side of the
Parnellites now, and when the story Of the
episode was fully written on the pages of
history, praise and blame would be awarded
in very different fashion from the way ia
which they were awarded by Lord Sails
bury. Condemnation would not rest upon
the Parnellites, but would concentrate upon
their accusers.
PIvoTED UPON FoRGERIEs
Lord Kimberly 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 Sails
bury lacked generosity and cruelty treated
the man whom he considered fit to make
political alliance with in 1855.
Earl Spencer said he would venture to
say that the commission would never have
been appointed but for the forgeries. The
motion of Lord Salisbury placed the House
in a dilemma. IL must blindly accept the
report or act as court Of appeal. The
first course was an unworthy one, aud tho
second impossible without entering
into political matters which would place
many transactions in a very different
light. He could not support the motion
without also recording the great wrong in
fioted upon Mr.. Parnell The old methods
of governing Ireland had failed, and the
only remedy was TO throw upon Irishmen
the responsibility of managing their own
affairs.
ITS UNCoNSTITUTIoNALITY DENIED.
Lord Derby denied that the commission
vuo mn QfifnfiOnal nd Io,lat...d a.
was far more fit to deal with the matter
than a select committee would have been.
1t must be remembered, he said, that Mr..
Parnell refused jury trial. The commits
sion had thrown upon Irish affairs a light
far from agreeable to Mr.. Parnell.
=. Lord Rosebery saiG that the adoption of
the motion would do grave injustice both
to themselves and to the Parnellites. 1t
was degrading TO the Judges to thank them
for impartiality. The great objection to
placing the report on the journals of the
House was that it failed to distinguish be-
tween moral guilt and political crime.
None of the findings of the commission
were 50 serious as they appeared. II the
nationalists had used seditious language so
had the Uistermen, and that with the sane
tion of Lord Salisbury, Lord Randolph
Churchill. and Sir Henry James.
wHITEwAsHING ALLEGED.
AJ any rate Jne fatneillLeS mad been
whitewashed by the alliance Of 1885. He
severely censured the government for Offer
ing no reparation to Mr.. Parnell, and for
taking no stops to punish the Times. He
concluded with an eloquent reproach and
warning to the Irish aristocracy, saying
that all history gave evidence that an aris-
tocracy separated from the people was
doomed aristocracy.
The lord chancellor here denied that the
government had instigated charges against
the Parnellites.
Lord Granville reproached the govern
ment for leaving the burden of the debate
to the unionist peers, whom he congratu-
lated on their chivalry in defending one of
the least defensible acts of the government.
Lord Salisbury's motion was adopted
without division.