New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-03-04
AND DIssBcTNG THE REPORT.

AND DIssBCTING THE REPORT.
London. March 3-In the House of Commons
tonight Mr.. w II. Smith moved the adoption OIL
the report of the Parnell Commission lie con-
sdered that the course proposed would 90 a."
solute Justice to the members whose coh"uoV Ia"
been impugned, and to all persons lncluueu Ill 'nc
allegations of the newspaper whicn ia" P
lisbed the charaes (Ironcal Parnellite cheers.)
Was there any one in the House VINO ulu hoo
want to see Justice done. even to that news
paper? Cheers There were certain features
Of the publications which were deeply TO be de-
,,orod but other accusations were justified by
the report II was a unique report Opposition
laughter but the imparuality of the judges had
been acknowledged by the accused members, whose
aconittal from personal charges ne thought
subject for hearty congratulations
REGARDING the Commissions finding certain re-
spondents guilty of conspiracy, the Government
might be asked why it did not take action thereon
He held that it no part of the intention oI
,he Government to constitute Commission with
the view of inficting punishment upon 'ha
Parnelltes Groans and laughter from the Up
position.
Mr.. Gladstone NJ owed the amendment announced
by Mr. Morley on February "a, declaring 'hao
the House reprobates the charges, oasea upoii
calumny that have been made against members oi
the House, and, while expressing satisfaction "o
the exposure made of evil-doers, regrets "lc
wrong inflicted and the suffering and loss endured
through those acts of fagrant ml4ui'N' MI
Gladstone said he desired 10 avoid party recrlii"-
ton If the Government motion had been su'hci-
ont 70 do Justice TO the members impugned. hc
would have been ready to support Ii. bu' II was
utterly insufficient 1t failed to represent the
sense of opinion which the House and the coun-
fry had formed upon the Commission report
Although he felt il to be his duty to critlcIse
freely some of the Judges statements, he belicNed
there was not a line of the report. from the ne
Ginning 10 the end. that was not written IN honor
and good faith Cheers
Was it, he asked, ever before proposed to de-
Lucrative body that they should accept IN
Iump a report of 100 folio pages, brlstilns win
controversial matter? In what respect had tie
three Judges Of the Commission more weight and
authority than other experienced men In deciding
how far crime was due TO 'hd
League, and how far oppressive eVlc-
tioas? The Commissions report touched
these and other questions onc-debated politically
by men as capable of deciding thereon as '"e
indpes who constituted the Commission As an
instance of their disproportionale and unbalanced
Judgment. the Judges had unearthed an obscure
naper. The Irishman," filing several pages OF
tbejr report with extracts thcleirom, which ha.'
been termed by Archbishop Walsh most ahomin'
able Were they equally liberal i'll according
blame for other things that were quite as aoomin-
able? {" Hear, heari"
When they dealt with the grand capital Of
fences into which they were especially drcc'ci
10 inquire, all that was said, without one sin-le
word of denunciation, was that the letter on which
the detestable charges were founded was forgery
iCries Of Hear, hear,7l The report convicted 'ne
respondents OF Joining the League with view 10
,bc separation of Ireland and England. This oc-
Cured in 1850 In 1890 lie reJoiced 10 believe
that The idea OF a separation was dead Ulcers
But he maintained that the denial of the m"f'
authority of the union WAS IN lrshmen 10 moral
offence whatever Cheers Further, the report
said that the Parnellites, by their speeches, had
melted intimidation, which had lei to cr-me anu
that they had not assisted In maintaining oIuei
bv denouncing the advocates OF physical fore
These charges were ten years old. 1t was DAD
and dangerous precedent to recur 10 these lone
dates in order to obtain matter to hurl at the
heads Of political antagonists. (" Hear. hear
Let the House consider what counter-allega-
tions ought 70 be made in behalf Of the Par
nellites Did not the Tories themselves think
that something could be said in behalf Of Mr..
Parnels policy, when Lord CarnavOn, under the
assent Of Lord Salisbury asked Mr.. Iarn'll 10
devise scheme Of government for Ireland?
e heersJ Could the Conservatives now censurc
the man whose persistent agitation had Ied 10 the
Land acts and other efforts that ha1 produced
beneficial results in LELAND? t. Hear. hear
Had they even heard Of the great revolutionary
changes brought about i'll the condition of the
Nation without the doing Of anything contrary
10 law and OrCer
Changes had already taken place in Ireland. and
reforms were impending, which owed their in.
uetus 10 the ParnclllcS These reforms would
be accomplished without violence. largely through
the wise and constitutional methods of the lrlsh
party The report said nothing Oh these matters.
Perhaps the judges felt II was no part Of Their
duty to refer to them. The speaker hesiatcd 10
embody in the amendment an expression OF
thanks TO the Commission. because II was haz-
ardOus and unprecedented 10 render thanks for
the performance of "A Judicial duty
Mr. Gladstone further said that In asking me
House to rive full effect TO the acquitt3l Of Mr..
Parnel on AL serious charges, he would have tie
members recolect the inialny OF the accusations.
If these accusations had been proved fafneH
would have been branded as an assassin, coward,
liar and hypOcrite. The charges were not
made at random; they were made with "A solemn
assurance that they had been subjected TO the most
careful scrutiny. For a long time Mr Parnell
had stood thus pllored before the country. Was
not full reparaton due him? The opinion cN-
pressed in the amendment was Scant enough Tcpa-
ration. Let not the members hesitate 70 give
what acknowledgment Of regret they could to
man who had suffered enormous wrong.
(Cheers)
Mr. Gladstone emphasized the fact that, al
though in some sense the Judges the Pamcllitcs
and the Government were all OH trial, ii was
mainly the character Of the House which, when
brought before the tribunal Of history-a tribunal
which no Parliament or party can finally evadc-
will suffer or gain according as on this occasion
its course is wise and just or IL sets a prcccdctt
unworthy Of its high honor and extremely dan
cerous as an example for future Parliaments
After declaring that the report expressed a
number Of opinions upon issues which
were in no judicial. Mr.. Gladstone criticised
at length and in detail many points Of tie report
Referring 30 the Judges statement that the land
LEGISLATION Of 1881 had no effect regards the
diminishing Of crime he declared it entirely un-
true But, whether true or untrue, the question
was entirely non-judicial, which the House was
called upon 10 debate.
Regarding the charge Of relieving persons sup
posed 10 be engaged in crime. he said that more
trumperv charge had never been made in State