St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-01-29
HOPE FOR HOME RULE
The Aspect Of the Cause Given
by Very High Au-
thopity.
ParnelI's Great Mistake Was
in Making No De-
Tense.
A Leader May Be Lost, But
His Place Will Be
Filled.
Justice will Yet Be Dealt Out
to the Long Suffering
People.


Rt. Rev. Bernard O'Reilly, ID. D., in
the January number Of the American
Catholic Quarterly Review
There was, when the OShea trial
came up-in November, golden oppor-
tunity for Mr.. Parnell to satisfy his
countrymen that his honor was un-
touched, and thereby to maintain his
position as the national leader. This
he could and should have done by act
ing exactly in accordance with his own
precedent on the occasion of the pro-
ducton of the Pigott forgeries. MIR.
ParnelI, from his place in the house OF
commons, then Solemnly pledged his
word of honor that the letters never had
been written by him. This perfectly
satisfied the Irish people and the Lib
eral party in England. 1t satisfied all
but the most incredulouS and bigoted
Tories that a forgery had been COM
mitted and that both the Times and the
government were in greater peril than
the honor of the Irish leader.
In November last, when the divorce
court was sitting, and Mr.. ParnelPs
honor was questioned and involved in
the issue, when, too, he was told by
more than one voice in the public press
and one friend in private, that if the
verdict went against him he must de-
Scend from his position as leader OF a
great national parUy-What was his con-
duct?
Did he publish letter, address or man.
ifesto affirming on his honor as gen
tleman that he was guiltless of the
crime-no less heinous than forgery
laid to his charge by his once friend and
follower, Capt. O'Shea?
His Great Mistake.
Neither then, nor since, not even
when a simple though solemn denial of
guilt would have saved the Irish party
from disruption, and turned away from
the national cause the mortal blow
aimed at it did Mr.. Parnell vouchsafe
one word of Genial or self-justifcatiOn.
To all who to the last chung to the be-
lief that MIR. Parnell was innocent, and
that the 0'Shea lawsuit was only the
last act in the Tory conspiracy against
Ireland, which would result in Mr.. Par
nell's turning the tables on his SANDER
ers, his conduct on the above occasion
was sore disappointment.
1t is true that some vague passages in
Mr.. Parnel's public utterances have
been interpreted as a request that his
friends and the nation at large shall
suspend judgment in his case. And we
are also aware that theory of his in
nocence has been seriously entertained,
based on the eccentrlcities and peculiar
methods of the man, notably his action
at the time of the Pigott investigation.
Still, the fact Stares us in the face, that
not a single formal, authentic and I'M
questionable assurance of innocence
has by him been given to any one.
But be that as it may, his guilt or his
innocence forms no essential factor in
the solution of the Irish problem as it
now confronts us. The public will dis
cuss and solve the question of criminal
ity or outlines according to its own
partlality, preiudices or passions.
If the verdict Of guilty is final
and general. men of the world will
not be at a loss to find circumstances
which will appeal to the compassionate
and merciful side OF our nature.
If Mr.. ParEell is really innocent, and
can triumphantly prove himself to be
SO, he may indeed thus vindicate his
personal purity, but the vindication
must henceforth be at the expense of
his political sagacity. For he, the
leader of nation, by his very willing
ness 10 appear guilty, has preciDitated
in Irish affairs the same disastrous con-
sequences as if he were the guilty
and dishonored man Capt. O'Shea
has been endeavoring to prove him
to be. Ii was objectionable, consider
ing the position he held among people
so prOverbially pure and so watchfully
jealous of the sanctity of their homes.
III Mr.. Parnell to continue his relations
with the O'Sheas after the Galway cleo
ton, together with his suspicious and
mysterious conduct ever since.
This is first count on which the YER
diet of public opinion must be against
him.
The second fault committed by him,
in this regard. was his not making
known to the men who had right to
his confidence, some good reason for the
silence maintained by him after the YER
dict in the divorce suit was rendered;
and, more especially for not reaffirming
the assurances given to the archbishop
of Dublin when the divorce proceedings
were first instituted.
A learned jurist once said that 1.-THE
next thing to being right was to appear
to be right" If this be true-and it is
most certaInly-Surely the worst thing
conceivable for the cause of Ireland was
that her chosen and popularity idolized
leader should be really innocent of the
one sin most abhorrent to Irishmen
next to taithfulness to God, while allow
ing himself deliberately to be pro-
claimed or to be held guilty of it.
Under whichever of these two aspects
we view the case of Mr.. Parnell, we are
compelled to say that he has
Betrayed Weakness
of which he was not suspected. grievous
moral frallty, on the one hand, and a
woful lack of political sagacity on the
other. Both together, like the break
ing down of the main shaft and the in
rush of the mad waters on the Getty of
Paris" have left the Irish cause help
less and adrift in mid-ocean. The lead
ers in parliament and the Irish people
at home and abroad have, by this sad
laundering, become the prey of deplora-
Bile dissensions. the question forces
itself on all SeriOuS-minded men: How
can man so discredited by his own
fault or by his lack of Judgment in such
a momentous crisis, ever hope toresume
his former usefulness as the leader Of
the National party?
Another feature of this sadly men,
orable series of events is the part taken
by the body of Irish archbiShops and
bishops in their endeavor to save the
life of their nation and the cause of
home rule by saving the unity and in
tegritv of the parliamentary party, by
by securing to them the continued sup
port of the English Liberals.
The letter of Mr.. Gladstone, calling
for the withdrawal of Mr.. Parnell, taken
together with the verdict of the divorce
court, seems to have disturbed the usual
eQuanimity Of man weakened by long
Illness and racking anXieties. We can
not otherwise account for the
Contradictory Judgments
given by Mr.. Parnell himself of the
famous visit to Hawarden castle, and
his irreconcilable estimates of Mr.. Glad
stones trustworthiness as an advocate
of full measure of home rule for Ire
land.
Mr.. Gladstone's letter, MI. ParnelPs
manifesto, and the subsequent letters
and interviews of themselves and their
friends, relating to the Hawarden con-
ference are Of too recent occurrence to
need recounting here.
Setting aside tho questions of con-
sistency and truthfulness arising out of
the painful conflict of statements and