New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-03-14
THE PREMIER.

ment moved by Mr.. Labouchere to the address
In reply to the Queens speech recommending
the abolition of the veto power OF the House OF
Lords
A. J. Balfour Conservative leader little
later asked the Government what it's intentions
were In regard to its defeat on Mr.. Laboucheres
motion. Sir William Harcourt Chancellor of the
Fxchequer and Government leader answered
that the Government intended to proceed with
the current business
The debate on the address to-day was opened
nv LORD Randolph Churchill. who said he con-
sidered the programme Of the Ministry an in
sane one if IL was meant to be carried out in
single session of Parliament. 1t supreme
arrogance on the part of the Minister'S he
thought to ask thu House to pass soNnmanage-
able a programme IN the face of an opposition
Of over 800 members who were prepared to re-
sent both the abolition Of the House of Lords
and the creation of Home Rule for Ireland. As
+, Home Rule he declared he could successfully
predict that there was not one man living to-
day who would live to see the establishment Of
an Irish Parliament. nor was there a man liV-
ING who would live to see the abolition of the
House Of Lords.
1obr Morley. Chief Secretary for Ireland in
sisted that there could be no injury to Ireland
through a temporary suspension of the Home
tu:ed Ministry would not be allowed to hold its
views on the Irish question, he would not be
member of that Ministry. (Cheers) Home Rule,
he continued had neither been delayed nor aban-
doned but would take its place in the course
Of sequence. as had been arranged prior TO Mr.
Gladstones retirement. As to the Irish party
Withdrawing its support from the Government
he was happy to say there were no signs OF any
such disastrous and mischievous event. There
could be no mistake in the minds Of any one who
had read the speech made in the House of Lords
Yesterday by Lord Rosebery that he meant TO do
all i'm his power to achieve Home Rule, besides
reducing the House of Lords to its proper place
as the legislative organ Il is now recognized to be
in the minds Of the English people.
IREIANDs DIsTRUsT OF LORD RosEBERY
John Redmond. Parnete. said that never dur
ing his experience in Parliament had more diff
fcult and humiliatng task fallen upon a CHER
Sc retary for ireland than the present one.
which put him up to try by the strength of his
own character as a genuine friend Of Ireland to
remove the impression created by the halting
and ambiguous phrases of Lord Rosebery. What
ever Mr. Morley might say. he declared, ireland
would not trust Lord Rosebery.
The Speaker repudiated Lord ROseberys doc
tr!ne that an English majority was necessary
for the passage OF Home Rule. The theory was
insulting and humatng TO ireland. which alone
had the right to decide. If Lord Rosebery's doc
trine was right, the Lords had the power TO con-
tinue 10 throw out Home Rule any other
measure the House Of Commons might pass If
that right belonged TO the House Of Lords through
privilege of birth then he declared Great Britain
would ring with the cry for its abolition.
Joseph Chamberlair said the UniOnists were
satisfied with the adhesion of the Government
.klf~ ia ,.c1fcx doH Hni 70 iCSn
on which TO meet them on all sides. Everybody,
he thought. ought to be satisfied except. perhaps,
Mr. Labouchere who was going about like Di-
ogenes with his lantern. looking for an honest
friend.
Mr.. LABOUCHERE'S sLASHING ATTACK.
Mr. Labouchere said that ne was one Of the
many who were dissatisfied with the manner in
which the Liberal party had been transferred
TO its new leader. What he asked. had they
been engaged in Throughout. the evening except
discussing the words used by Lord ROsebery in
the House OF Lords Personally, a supremely
simple person daughter. he gave those words
their plain meaning Therefore. he concurred
with Mr. Redmond in saying that the position
Of Home Rule had been entirely changed by the
remarks of Lord Rosebery yesterday Cries OF
"No! No") What, he asked were the facts?
Did ne understand that Home Rule depended
upon an English majority in its favor? If that
were the fac. why had the time of the last ses-
sion been wasted over bill! which did not yet
have a British majority
Why he inquired. should the House Of LORDS
be consulted on the question Of Home Rnie
Mr. Gladstone had declared that Home Ruic wa
the absolute right Of Ireland. without any reIer-
ence L. a majority Of the United Kingdom. F0,
Lord Roscbery to say that Home Rule couIu
not be granted until it had an Engsn niaJTi ro,iry
was q distinct retrOgression OF parry P'iiNs
Cheers from the Irish benches) HIS con-
stituents had given him a positive mahua.e
that ~ there was no declaration In the queen ;
speech I'm favor OF Home Rule or no dlstihCt
announcement that the Cabinet meant To hsn.
against the House Of Lords ne must MOI ords d
amendment to the address. regarding the lLoiua
and why should he hesitate? tCheers) lhe.e
could not possibly be worse BODY OF men ~, w
perform what were the supppscu eT'vn ordc - he
Second Chamber than the present LoTds.
for one was tired OF pouring sound itaalUai
liquor into vat with a bung. like Lord sans
bury ready TO let 1t all out. ,haug",Sl @ YER or,,s
IT was said that object lessons Hke me t-1ia "a
were rcouired by the country. The Radicais hau %
had enough Of those objes lessons. ana Were nv
readv "a % in and fight 10 crush the foust 80 U
Iords IChsers1 The existing state o1 tnihs'
was intolerabe. The speaker iavOfeu III. ,.as
lutte abolition Of the House OF Lol9S, IL % veto
stiu ready to accept q paralysis OF theii -.
no,rer Ue couldn't for a moment suppose lhae
he LORDS themselves would prefer at9n'lGn 70 70
being kept like rocks in rooheIts s,''P'
sit and cav and complain. uaugh'ei'
R1ov AT THE POWER OF THE PhE'''
Mr. Labouchere theh HoNcu NJ o..ors
nroviding that the power now enJoyea oS P''"
who were not elected TO Parliament ny '"e -
process of the franchise. yet "no a.
prevent the passage of bills' shall va" rx.
Cir wuism Harcourt Chancellor Oh inc HN
chaouor onnosed the amendment III an i"'P' 30
si,,a sreech taking the ground tha' d "e'
oharac,er ought 10 be acted on
only y0e afer the most serious dsiOeTa1on members
When the division was dnnSere takeni "a amendment
~ ne "A
q snt in the obbies after the purposey
the vote. The division was moved s'balf - the
during the dinner hour MIN the Irish members
members were absent: All '"
supported Mr. Labouchere. ,,ross ves resumed
When the debss on the moved nSSs an amendment
Joseph Kenny, Parnel'i.,e, 49, had come when the
to the effect thaS oers ere convicted under the Trea-