New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-02-12

surprised that SlI Richard Webster had allowed
himself TO he made the vehicle Of such apology
This was the earliest chance the House had had
and II the most OppOrtuue moment for II 10
cNpress its INDIGNATION over the publication of the
iOIgeTicS. II TIE conspiracy against Nj. Parncll
had been successful. the result to him would
have hccn abSoi Itc political DEATH and the mortal
blow struck al lin would have been felt through
ont the irish Nation ilhccrSl HE Times had
aimed 10 affect the Judgment OF the House. and
J, had really had IN thai direction a temporary
success He did not Wis! to dwell upon the hor-
uh!c and loathSUmc character of the whole affair
He trusted the House would Vindlcatc It's night
10 deal with tie offence. The Government owed
II to itself 10 deal fairly toward Mr.. ParncN
and the insh people for the injustice done 10
both through the lorgcrics. Surely the House
should not hesitate 10 express It's full sense OF
Mr. Haifonr accused Mr.. Gladstone of dealing
in iiimsy fiction. lie declared that The delay was
the fault Of the Gladstone party alone. ana sad
the charge that The Times" had acted with a
view 10 influencing the Judgment of the House
Mr. Iabouchcrc expressed his surprise at the
petty and p3ltV arguments advanced ny MI
lalfour and Sir John GQrSt. II had been proyr%a
that The Times had supplied PigGoti WIN
bank notes to provide for his family WITHIN ten
days Of the time when he had aasconded lie
could understand the reticcncc OF Mr.. Slnlth on
this suhicct. lie could not defend his old TREND
Mr.. Walter, and was naturally not inclined 10 at
tack him He should remember however. that
lie is the leader Of the House Of Commons
Sir Edward Clarke, the Nohcitor-Geicral, aO-
vanccd numerous prccedeutS for the course oI thc
Government IN this ease. and declared that II was
inconsistent with the principles OF justice 10 pT0Sc-
cute The Times" again. for such "a proceeding
would he a c0ToarY of the adoption Oi thc moIlph.
Mr.. Parncll, who was enthusiastically checic
as he took the floor, SAID SIR Edward clarke ha"
not Venturcd 20 present the delay aS reason
auainSt the vote on breach of privilege, for hr
well knew that IIansard'S debates contained many
precedcntS of the House. inQuirng at great cn.th
and very carefully. before lnfictln- the penalty
for breach ot privilege Why did not the FoF-
crnmcnt appoint tie committee of inquiry os>gd
for I'm the heeiuninE' That would have made
il possible 70 prove that the letters were tor-enes
in for-Y-cicht hours.
Il never determined. he said. not 10 submit
tie facts To jury. hui always c"uSIderrd Il
absolutely necessary 10 discover from whom Inc
Times obtained its Letters. ] recognized. now.
ever +hat il was impossible TO compel ine ZINES
The clsc Of ODonncl versus Walter proved thtb
I was justified therein. Without knowing from
whom the letters came. ! would not have Uccli
able 20 prove that they were forgcrlcs, and
trained cNIcrtS in the country against ne.
There would have been only my own
letters. advanced and printed as mine upon the
great authority of The Times. were I"iI''-
You wanted to usc tho~' letter, as political cH.
circ. not caring whether they were or were NOT
forccric,. You saw that it wa, impossible for rs
10 prove that they were torpcrleN very sierIlN'
and that meanwhile they would be useful t. Noi
in elections You used them 10 make
c1p,'"I eSc cni6c 31'' for ob,aininr @ an inquiry
into much wider qucstio" which YOU would
never have obtained apart from letters that were
Administering a severe rcproof 10 Sir Richard
Webster Nr Parncll continued: l. 'tr lra I"r
of uarty that must always De in u" minority
here. should he sorry - treat my most p""rr'
on,oncrt> with tie incredible mcoun's~ srl rDN.
ar3icc with which have been treated hE them
i1i,n1 EIrn by %o" re terms '' Of the anne. dm-a,
which insmuatc> that 'Ae fore Letter III F..
after all he genuine. lf y'n believe tho~" letters