New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-11-30
MIR. GLADSTONE DENIES IT.
A PROMPT CONTRADICTION OF MR.. PAR.
NELLS STATEMENTS

PROPOSALS AsCRIBED TO HIM IN THE HAwARDEX
INTERVIEW WHICH THE LIBERAL LEADER
NEVER MADE-MR. DAvITr AGAIN
SCORES PARNELL.
London, Nov 2O.--Mr. Gladstone has issued .
reply to Mr. Parnels manifesto, in which he
denies in toto all the statements made ~ the Irish
leader in regard to the retention Of Irish Members
in the Imperial Parliament, the settlement of the
land or agrarian difficulty in Ireland, the control
of the Irish constabulary and the appointment OF
the judiciary aasIreland. Mr.. Gladstone says he
will not apply single epithet to Mr. Parneu, NIT
being his judge. lie believes, however, thst he
showed by his course in the matter OF the special
Commission appointea to investigate the charges
made against Mr. ParneII growing out Of the
Pigott letters that he had no indisposition to do
Mr.. Parnell justice.
Mr. Gladstone then comes forthwith to n recital
Of the proposal alleged by Mr.. Parnell in his mani
festo to have been made to him during his visit to
Mr. Gladstone at Hawarden last November in re-
gard to the intended proposals with regard 10
Home Rule in the event Of the Liberal party
winning at tie then neat general election Mr.
Gladstone declares that no single suggestion was
offered by him to Mr.. Parnc either formal
or as a final one Mr.. Gladstone simply made
statement. perfectly free and without prejudice,
of the points on which Mr.. Gladstone, or such of
his colleagues as he could consult were inclined
to believe the Home Rule plan of 1856 could he
improved, and concerning which he was desirous
to know whether any serious objection had risen
in the mind OF Parnell 70 none of these suggcs-
tions did Parnell raise & serious objection.
Mr. Gladstone denies that he made the state
ments which Parnells memory ascribes to him,
or anything substantially resembling them, either
as to the retention of the Irish members in the
Imperial Parliament, or rs to tine settlement OF
the land question, or the aerarian difficulties, or
the control of the constabulary, or the appoint
ment of the judiciary. The conversation between
them was strictly confidential. To publish even
true account is to break the seal Of confidence
which alone renders political Cooperation possible
Every suggestion made to MIR. Parnell was from
written memoranda TO which Mr. Gladstone can re-
fer Neither Parnell nor himself was bound by the
conversation to an absolute acceptance of the pro-
posals canvassed. During the year that had since
elapsed he had never received from Mr farheh
any intimatiOn of an alteration Of his views re-
garding any of them.
In conclusion Mr.. Gladstone says that nc mas
always held, both in public and in private, thas
the National party of Ireland ought to remain
entirely independent of the Liberal party OF
Great Britain 1t is their duty and his duty, con-
formally with the spirit of Grattan and OConnell.
to study all adjustments in the great matter OF
Home Rule which may tend TO draw to their side
moderate and equitable men. But for him to pro-
pose any measure except such as Ireland could APP
prove on the lines already laid down would bs
faulty as regards himself and treachery TO tho
Irish Nation, in which, even by the side OF Far
neil. he can claim to take an interest
Michael Davitt was interviewed to-day regard
all terribly sad and sickening. IL the Irish party
had been aware OF the circumstances and acted
with courage at first all would have been well.
Thcv were bewildercd, and no wonder here We
arc now in splinters. The Parnell manifesto u
i, last desperate move. do not see how he could
have struck Ireland worse blow. lie is furious
against a majority of his party. and in his anger
against them and Mr.. Gladstones letter he runs
amuck According TO him, number OF the ,Ia men,-
ers of his own party are false, and Mr.. Gladstone
md English Liberal wirepullers are scheming
,ganst him The Home Rule proposals outlined
1t Hawarden were entirely inaaeqoaG oss ;m,or,ans
IN Mr. Parneil's opinion, but he forgets that he
agreed to similar proposals in the oill Of 1856:
lie now declares against the cuttng-down OF
rish representation at Westminster, but in 1886
he agreed to Clause "a Of the bill which entirely
excluded Irish representation, and further agreed
clauses retaining, 1oI tn1E he ISnd bill uro.
,osed by Mr.. Gladstone was quite apart from the
Home Rule question and was finally % SnsndoneS; aha S
make this appeal before? These Hawarden pro-
,osals were as bad then as now:
y, tro'w ,yhether MIR Parnell did not agree to
II hem. m Mr.. Gladstone. Mr.. Morley and. believe.
William o'Brien, were parties to ISsp the COM @
Isaaynwbile no matter what the manifesto may
10 for Mr. Parnells own position he has shattered
III hone of Home Rule Tor years. and that TOO.
or personal ends and revenge. just as in 1882 hs
the Land League 10 get out OF kimain-
asm Jail. and was prepared in 1855 to smash