New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-03-12
THE COMMISSIONS REPORT.
MR. SMITHS MOTION AGREED TO AFTER AN
EXCITING DEBATE IN THE HOUSE.

Arr GsosCHEN BANDYING EPITHETS WITH THE
pARNEI.LLrIrs-IoRD RANDOLPH CHARGES
THAT THE COMMISSION PROCEED
INGs WE'RE UNCONSTITUTIONAL
MR.. CHAMBERLAIN DE-
FENDs HIMSELF
London. March lin the House OF
Commons this. evening Lord hahuoipn
Churchill resumed the debate on the re-
port of the Parnell Commission lie SAID that
from the inception of the Commission he had
watched the proceedings with feelings of sorrow
and apprehension which had grown deeper ana
stronger as the proceedings developed From he
ginning to end these proceedings were vitlated by
their thoroughly unconstitutional character.
(Cheers from the Oppostion) When the Govern
ment decided to set aside the ordinary tribunals,
il must have held that the charges against the
Parnellites constituted prma facie case against
the accused When a Government held that there
was prima facie case, ii was its duty TO prose
cute crminally. tParnellite cheers If there was
prima facie case to Justify an extraordinary
tribunal, fortiori, there prima facie case
to proceed by criminal prosecution Hear. hear
In the first place. the Government. in order 10
ascertain the truth of criminal charges against
ordinary law of the land. (Parnellte cheers
Secondly the Government constituted. under a
special Act a commission consisting of three
Judges, to fulfil the functions of Judge and jury.
for the purpose of trying a criminal conspiracy
1t decided to place political opponents on trial on
criminal charges without the protection whlch
a jury would give. Cheers
Thirdly. the Government nominated the
tribunal: so the accused unlike the meancst
criminal. would have no voice in selecting and
challenging the jury. If it was argued that the
commission court of arbitration where, In
the whole history of arbitration. was one party to
q suit left voccless in the selection OF the arpl-
traitors? Cheers
Fourthly the Government inflicted on its op-
ponents heavy penalty. in the shape of a large
pecuniary fine amounting to nearly t4o.ooo
The speaker argued the matter on constitutional
grounds. and defed any lawyer TO show pre-
cedent or parallel for anything approaching the
Governments action. tParnellite cheers lie
appealed to the House TO vote against proceedings
so utterly unique and unprecedented Never
within century and half had any public man
been exposed 10 such tests and trials as had Mr.
Parnell. Parnellite cheers
When certain persons imagined that Mr. farneli
quailed before the proposed inquiry. he put such
a pressure on the Government that the free gift
came a measure forced upon the House at any cost
deposition cheers. Every clause except the
first was forced through without debate by a use
of closure so ruthless that nothing but the most
urgent consideration of public safety could
Justify it. Opposition cheers. The consutu-
tonal party that in 1882 resisted closure now
applied it. No Minister could accuse him OF IN
consistency when the enormous Inconsistencies OF
the Government considered In 1882 the
Government declared that closure was a most un
constitutional and dangerous innovation; In lsss
it used closure in a most unconstitutional ana
dangerous manner, for the purpose of forcing upon
its opponents unprecedented, unparalleled ana
tremendous instrument of oppression. Nemesis
attended the Government for adopting such
methods.
In appointing the Commission, the Government
violated the Constitution. In making tlils mo
tion, the Government was violating It's own
law. The report condemned certain persons ana
acquitted others. But did it condemn all the
guilty parties II condemned the Parnelltes Oi.
certain charges. Did it condemn The Times !:
If the Government insisted upon its motion. and
insist upon his right to vote to condemn not only
tie Parnelites. but also ct" The Times. which had
been found guilty OF an atrocl"us ana uneN-
ampled libel and SANDER.
Mr.. Chamberlain said 1t was on the lnvltauon
OF the Parnellites that the matter was made a
subject OF inquiry. If the Government had In
stituted criminal proceedings, il would have been
open to all the censure which Lord Randolph
Churchill had bestowed upon it.. The Govern.
mcnt treated the allegations as bels, which might
or might not be dsproved. and indicated then
that the accused should take the usual steps to
defend their characters.
He denied that the Commission was inc thc
result of his personal suggestion. tx
perience showed that it was the best
and only oSssn IT, t" that thG the
would not be impartial That was not said now
CParncllite cries of Yes; 1t was urged that
1.-The Times # found guy wC@d nsse psP
nelite cheers but all allegations against the
Commission proved to be baselcss. No farIia-
mentary Committee could have conducted the
inouiry so cxhaustively and well
He urged that there was no reason for recciv-
ing with suspicion the findings OF any constitu-
tiona tribunals Mr.. Gladstone had admitted The
asituity, ability, learning and G, absolute iooo
faith of the judges. Cheers Sir Charles Rus
sell had spoken Of their Judgment as impartial
The fact that the Judges were spoken of as
having prcpossessions and political sentiments
should not vitatc their findings on matters ol
fact The House would simply adopt the genera
effect of the report without pled2ing ltself tt
The speaker asked to whom the House would
appeal, if it refused 10 adopt the Judges opin
ion on matters of fact. He warned the House
with an imperfect recollection Of the terms o.
the report. against assuming judicial luncti9,n1'
by declining TO accept the Judges findings: i''
urged the House to leave the matter in the hands
Of the Nation. Cheers.
Mr. Jennings withdrew his amendment.
Mr. Cane l-iieral Unionist moved simila
amendment, condcmnng The Times which wa
rciccted-32l to 250.
Mr. Jennings explained that he had no dcsir
10 stab the Government in the back Lord Ran
dolph Churchill's speech was complete surpriS
10 him and changed his position. his own amend
mcnt not being intended TO be hostile to the Gov
eminent He cOntended that Commission shoul,
never have been appointed TO inquire into th
minor charges against the Parnellites, whicl
in 1885 had not deferred the Government
from accepting Irish support. Had the seriou
charges hcen proved. Mr.. Parnell must have
been expelled and prosecuted. Why hesitate t'
express satisfaction at his acquttal? 18th,
Times, had daily driven the charges home witt
every device that malice could suggest, and it de
served censure.
Mr. Chaplin declared that the Conservatives ha
pevcr believed that "Thc Times" letters wer
M, oh and langhterl. hut tL