St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-02-21
ENGLAHO'S PREMIER TALKS
THE GRAyD OLD NAV SkLUTED WIN
LOUD CHEERS
IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
He Speaks on the Employers
Liability Bill IN Behalf or thu
Working Glasses Radicals
Expecting an Attack on the
House of Lords Were Much
Disappointed.

ANANLO-f ~ 4IlCkO WAS ~ liQk
BILE gathering in the house OF commons
today in anticipation of hearing a great
speech from Mr.. Gladstone, who, ac-
cording to report, was to make an attack
upon the house of lords in connection
with the recsnt so-called obstruction of
legislation as evidenced by the amend
mert made by the peers to such p0pu-
lar measures as the parish councils bill
n the employers liability bill. not to
mention the rejection by the house of
lords of the hons rule bill. The house
was crowded and it was nutIced that
many peers were present in the gallery.
Mr.. Gladstone, carefully dressed aud
with a flower in his ~buttonhole, entered
during the Questions" portion of the
preliminary proceedings, and "a loudly
cheered, not only by his admirers. but
by many of the opponents Of the Grand
Old Man. Mr.. Gladstone was not long
in the h0uSs before he arose in answer
to a question put by Sir Ellis Ashmead-
Bartlett, one OF the Members for Shelf
field, and said that there was no evil
dence that the Brazilian insurgents had
constituted a government of such a
character as to entitle them to recogni-
ton as belligerents. After the rest of
the questions had been disposed OF
MIR. GLADSTONE,
amidst long and most enthusiastic
cheers, moved the discharge of order of
the employers liability bill. The speech
of MIR. Gladstone, In making this motion.
only lasted fifteen minutes. The pre-
mier said during the course of his re-
marks that he Was convinced thata
large majority of the working classes
were opposed TO the house of lords
amendments. and therefore the govern
ment had no option but to withdraw
the bill.
The Radicals, who had been eagerly
expecting Mr.. Gladstone to make an
attack pon the house of lords, showed
disappointment as the speech pro-
crossed.
The premier, In his mildest tones,
argued simply against the contracting
out" amendment. saving that fro III all
the evidence presented he thought the,
working people and the friendly socie-
ties objected to the house of lords pro-
vision.
The government, continued Mr.. Glad
stone, believed that the working people
were the best judges in matters which
related to their affairs. [Cheerse
And if the amendments were lncorpd-i
rated i'll the bill the M~Orkingmen's Sd.
curity would be impaired, and they
would be deprived of all the |
BENEFITS OF THE BILL.
Right Hon. A. j. Balfour, the Com.
sentative leader, who was also heartily.
cheered on all sides when he arose.,
defended the house of lords amend;
ments, claiming that the working ped
pie favored them.
Continuing, Mr.. Balfour said that lie
represented all industrial constituencies
and that lie had not received a singh
objection to the amendment.
Both the UniOniSts and the LiberaIA,
according to Mr.. Balfour, Were seut ID
the house of by the working.
classes. upon whose support both were
dependent. =
Replying to questions on the st6iedt,
Rt. Hon. A. j. Muudella, president of:
the board of trade, say that he was in
formed by the agents of the steamship
New York that she had not brought
back from New York numbers of Ital-
ian and Polish aliens who had been re-
fused admission to the United States.
The total of the people brought back
was eight, five who had been refused
admission under the contract law, and
three whose destination was unknown.
Finally the house, by a vote OF 225 to
6. adopted Mr.. Gladstone's motion, and
amid loud laughter the bill was with
drawn.
AS Mr.. Gladstone. wrapped in a
heavy cloak and accompanied by his
wife, drove to the house of commons he
WAC nR0nrdnI N 0rf L.
who recognized him, and especially by
the crowd which had assembled in
Palace yard, IN front of the house of
commons.
LONDON, Feb. 21.-The Times saws:
1t was intended that Mr.. Gladstone
should move the rejection of the lords
amendments stO the employers liability
bill, but it was found that this course
was contrary to precedent. Mr.. Glad
stone therefore moved the withdrawal
Of the bill.
The Gladstonians were disappointed
at the loss of a chance to reject the
amendments by a normal majority and
thus Obliterate the memory OF last
weeks bare ma jority of two on the Cobb
amendment. The government have
placed themselves in a ridiculous and
embarrassing position. Mr.. Gladstone's
followers had expected a great oratorical
effort from the premier-something
that would inspire them with courage
and strike dlsmay into the trembling
peers. They listened, instead, to one of
the feebiest speeches that Mr.. Glad
stone has delivered for some time.
The Chronicle calls yesterdays be-
bate In the house a ludicrous tiasco, and
says it would be difficult to imagine
more undignified and pointless oDse-
qules. Mr.. Gladstone's speech was
totally unworthy the occasion, and
chilled his followers to the bone. The
Liberal party has a right to know where
it stands. Ii Mr.. Gladstone feels that
age and infirmitie s press too heavily
upon him for the leadership of an un-
compromising crusade, it is for him to
say so.