The record-union., 1892-05-25
Special to the RECoRD-UNroS.


LONDON, May 24.-Discussion of the
Irish local government bill was re-
sumed to-day in the Commons. Glad
stone spoke at great length He said the
House was in singular position, dis
cussing bill which it was improbable
would be proceeded with. in 1886 Cham
perlaln and Lord Harrington promised
Ireland everything short of an independ-
ent Parliament. Now all these promises
are dissolved in the present meager
pllI which stamped Ireland with inequaI-
| lty, as compared with England and Scot
land, and tialsitied the miserable relics
OF solemn pledge by which the present
majority was obtained by the Govern
ment i'll 1886. Lord Salisbury's recent
language distinctly encouraged civil
war. Definite explanations ought to be
given whether the Cabinet were gener-
! ally OF the same opinion.
Did the Ministers believe" asked
| Gladstone, that the people of Ulster
! would rebel against the decision of Par
lament, or that the employment of the
| powers OF the crown TO suppress such re-
| belliOn would be such an outrage as wouid
rend society III two? Ii Lord Salisbury's
language meant anything, it was plain
lnducement to few misguided men to re-
| sort to violence to resist the authority of
Parllament. These were the conditions
the irish members had offered them in
/ the stlnted gift of the present bill"
Gladstone then at length examined the
leading provisions of the bill, and said it
stamped Ireland with inequality and in
| 1erlOrlty, by Withholding from her power
and privileges that obtained in her sister
! countries. Gould it be possible" asked
Gladstone, Ito conceive greater contempt
| In err al ,lte
i political principles? Could the bill be
called an honest effort to satisfy Irish
| aspirations, or fair attempt to lepisIate
| for Ireland? Rather might it be called
the refuse ofpolitical legislation. The bill
conferred on the Liberals one great adj
vantage. II gave the people power to
! measure and determine exactly the value
Of the splendid Conservative promises of
! absolute equality with the laws of Great
Britain. Was Ireland wrong in object
| ing to this measure? No. The STAMP of
inequality was brand of degradation.
Ii ireland was capable of accepting a
measure so stamped she was unworthy
OF the great men who had led her in
! times OF adversely; unworthy of that
happy, better destiny he trusted and be-
lleved she was about to accompIish.n -
! LCheerS.
! Baltour responded to Gladstone. He
analyzed and explained Lord Salisbury's
remarks, putting upon them more fav-
orabIe interpretation than that advanced
by Gladstone. Then, coming down to the
matter of the bill, he urged that it was
substantially the same as the English and
| Scotch bill. If there was a difference
it was due to the peculiar conditions pre-
vailing in Ireland. "The bill was op-
posed" said he, ''sOlely because it would
| not serve the purpose Of Irish agitators.
| What was the real aim of the Home
Rulers? 1t was separation. Cheers.
The bill would not do that for them.
The Government believed local govern
.ment would be a great boon to a popu-
latiOn knowing how to use it. The Gov
ernment desired to confer this boon on
Ireland. The issues were clear on their
side; it rested with Gladstone to make his
clear. Hear! Hear!] The Government
had shown that it still earnestly desired
| to accomplish what trained to do. What
Gladstone desired to do no human being
| knew"
| The bill passed to second reading
1856 tO247-amid great Conservative cheers,
| They were delighted at the solid majority
| The only GladstOuians who voted with
the Government were Storey and Villiers-
| The Liberals were disappointed at the
result, blaming it on the absence of so
many Irish members. Out of the -twen-
| ty-nine Parnellites only sixteen voted,
and out of nfty-fve McCarthyites only
! thirty-eight.