The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-02-17
AN APOLOGY TOIRISH.
London "Times Called to Ac-
count by Commons.
AN INSULT TO THE MEMBERS.
Churchill's Acrid and Flippsnt Re-
marks on the Bill Nettle Gladstone
-Labouchere Defends 1t.

LONDON. Feb 16-The Times explains in
long article that its statements inter-
preted TO the house as directed against the
Irish members were not intended
to charge anybody with corrupt
ness. but meant merely TO illustrate
the dangerous results of paying members
Of parliament. as these results were re-
vealed strikingly in the Panama affair.
After associating itself with Niscount
Wolmer's withdrawal and acknowledging
that he may have gone too Tar with his
his authority, the Times says:
We must decline. however, to admit that the
language of public discussion ought to be regu-
lated according to the standard set up In parlia-
meut. In public interest we say, as we have .
right to say, that Irish Nationalists have been
paid party-paid by the enemies of England.
LONDON, Feb. To- In the commons to-
day Sir Thomas Esmonde, anti-Parnellite,
called the attention of the house to a
speech made bv Viscount Woimer. Lib
eral Unionist, in St.James hall in which he
declared that the Irish members subsisted
on contributions made by the Gladstone
caucus. Esmonde Objec ed TO this. VOL
mer admitted that he had gone too far.
but believed he was justihed in saying
that some association was furnishing sup
port to needy Irish members. Sexton
characterized the statement as an inven-
ton, and demanded that the speaker en-
force an apology. The speaker declined
to interfere as the statement had been
made outside the house. Sexton said
Womer's statement had been used by the
Times as basis to heap calumnies on
Irish members, saying that Giadstone's
ho Irl u
mercenaries did not receive stipends from
the Liberal party fund or the private lib
erality of rich English partisans.
The speaker suggested to Viscount VOL
mer that unless he was prepared with
proof of his statements he should apollo.
gize. Wolmer acted on the suggestion
ungraciously.
Sexton then declared that the editor Of
the Times should be compelled to apollo
gze at the bar of the house.
Gladstone arose and said the publication
of the article in question by the Times in
which corruption was distinctly charged,
constituted breach of privilege.
Balfour, while making no attempt to
defend the Times, advised the house to
avoid a conflict with the press.
The house, however, approved the
motion by Mr.. Sexton that the editor of
the Times be called to the bar of the house
to apologize tor the publication of the
article.
Lord Randolph Churchill spoke when
debate was resumed on the home rule bill.
The scheme as described, he said, was
vague and unreal. Ireland, he said, had
been tranquil for years and why should
Gladstone persist in hopeless and inn
possible scheme? The issue raised by the
premier was virtually a repeal Of the
union. Lord Randolph Churchill closed
his speech with the prediction that if the
home rule bill passed the house, the Eng
Iish people would support the lords in re-
jecting it.
Lord Randolph Churchill spoke in an
acrid, fiippant manner. which plainly
rritated Gladstone.
Among the most intent listeners were
the Prince Of Wales and the Duke of FORK.
, fter indifferent speeches from Irish men,
bers, Labouchere spoke briefly, expressing
the opinion that the law was fairly salts
factory and Gladstone the greatest living
master of the fine art of legislation.
The Irish members later decided not to
persist in the demand that the editor Of
the Times appear at the bar of the house to
apologize for accusing them of corrupt
practices. They will be satisfied with the
publication of an apology in the Times.