St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-03-04


charges to Justify an Indictment for
treason, he was surprised that gentle
men who had been and might again be
ministers could excuse and palliate such
charges. He cited Mr.. Parne,l as au-
th0rity against the assertion that the
Conservatives. before coming into
Office, had pledged themselves not to
renew the coercion act. and he called
upon Sir William VernOn-HarcOurt to
apologize for that calumny. Sir Will
lam VernOn-Harcourt rose and sald he
had never heard such statement.
Then, declaring that he would not
stay to be abused. he left the house.
Sir Michael Hicks-Beach, continuing,
said he inferred that the Parnelites
voluntarily supported the Conserva-
tives in 1885 in order to equalize the
parties and secure
THE BALANCE OF POWER.
There was no reason for parliament
to cOndone the acts of the ParnalllteS,
which had been first authoritatiyely eS-
charges on which the Parnellites had
been acquitted were possibly more i'm
pOrtant to themselves and their per-
sonal honor: but the charges on which
they had been proved guilty were more
important to the community, because
they related to practices, the revival OF
which would he fatal to the liberty
and prosperity of the country.
Mr.. Gladstone emphasized the fact
that, although in some sense the judges,
the Parnellites and the government
were all on trial, it was mainly the char
acter OF the house which. when brought
before the tribunal of hietory-a tri-
bunal which no parliament or party can
finally eVade-
WILL SUFFER OR GAIN
according As on this occasion its course
is wise and just or it sets precedent
unworthy of its high honor and ex-
tremely dangerous as an example for
future parIiaments. After declaring
that the report expressed number OF
opinions upon issues which were in no
sense indical, Mr.. Gladstone criticised
at length and in detail many points Of
the report. Referring to the Judges
statement that the land league of
1881 had no effect as regards
the diminishing of crime, he
declared it entirely untrue. But
whether true or untrue the ques-
tion was entirely non-judicial which the
house was called upon to debate. Re-
garding the charge of relieving persons
supposed to I've engaged in crime, he
said :that more trumpery charge had
never been made in state indictment.
He declared that nothing was affirmed
against the Parnpllites now but what
had been affirmed by Mr.. Forster and
himself when they were in office.
"Why," he continued, "did you not
condemn them then? | will tell you why.
subjects for debate. Was the Tory idea
more severe? No. The Tory idea was
that these men were quite good enough
to associate with for political purposes.
The Tories rode into power upon Mr..
Parnell's shoulders. Now they for
sake him aud seek, by a vote Of
the house, to condemn his acts and
policy, the whole benefit of which they
took then and have held ever since"
Mr.. Gladstone pointed out that the ac-
ton of the Conservatives III using the
support of the ParnelliteS to Dust the
Liberal government, although they dis
approved the acts of the Pafnellites Oh
the ground that
THEY LED TO CRIME,
was parallel to the course of the Par
nellites in accepting donation from
the American physical force party, al
though they dtsapproved their policy.
The donation was accepted because that
fund for parliamentary purposes. He
admitted that there was time when he
himself did not recognize Parnell's
endeaVor to Wean the Irish from
criminal to constitutional methods, but
he had since come to regard Parnell as
a conservative force in the preservation
of law, order and peace in Ireland. He
declared that the Carnarv0n negOtia-
tionS ought to have been considered
full, absolute and final conformation
the Parnellites and an absolute
closing of the book of controversy. The
commission had taken great mass of
facts, and the judges said: 1--WE can
not look to the right or to the left; we
can look neither backwards nor for
wards. Ali we have to do is to return
a verdict on the dry facts" Was par
Lament to act on such principles? 1t
was the duty of the members as States
men and Legislators to survey the whole
range of circumstance and great historic
forces which brought about the Irish
crisis. Otherwise it would be impos-
sible to do justice. A parlia-
majority, delivering itself in con-
Sonance with its own views for
the purpose of discrpditing IFS political
opponents. would tend rather to lessen
than to add to the weight of the judges
verdict. In conclusion he appealed
from the Conservatives as a party to the
Conservatives as individuals. He said:
Il ask you as citizens and men to ac-
knowledge the law of
EQUAL MORAL OBLIGATION.
II ask you, man for man, to place
yourselves in Parnell's position. Is it
possible for you to do that without feel
ing that something remains due him?
And can you make that something
smaller than the amendment propose?
Give your judgment as men-not
Judgment that may be sus-
taine by majority of this
house, buta judgment that will bear
scrutiny in the heart and conscience of
every man when lie betakes himself to
chamber and is still. lentreat-l might
also say demand-that you pronounce
such Judgment as will give late and
scanty reparation for an enormous
wrong"