The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1897-01-02

lcal part1eS. Snall any Onefsus6esI ludt
if we find that the Unionist Cavern
ment, true to Its assurances with refer
.ence to Ireland. avalling of its great
mapority in the House Of Commons and
of it's friendly relationsswith the House
of Lords, attempts to rsdress some OF
those grievances to which I have re-
ferred, they will find from a single Irish
Natioiadist member any obstruction, any
difficulty in the way,Tany objection,
such man suggests that which is futile
and absurd. We shall be only too happy
to welcome such proposals, only too
happy to ease their passage through the
hoppy to ease their passage through the
House of Commons If we find that they
are adequate and sound remedies And
il they be not, If they be inadequate and
imperfect, as a good many proposals
from these benches have been III the
past, it will be our duty to endeavor to
amplify, to enlarge and amend them,
and make them suitable to the occasion.
What more evidence is there of unanim-
ity~of feeling among Irish Nationalists?
Men say they are prepared to come on
the same platform and shake hands,
metaphorically speaking, in the promo
ton of several questions-for example,
amnesty. They will join hands upon
the question of amnesty. Why? Be-
cause it is important in their judgment
that amensty should be obtained. and
they believe that union is necessary in
order to obtain it. / fnd statement
only the other day, from another quar-
ter, from another prominent gentleman,
that he was willing to join hands with
anybody in order that the people might
be- united on. the educational question.
AS. far as I know the people are not
divided upon the education question, and
the importance of union in order to
carry weight with the British Parlia-
ment upon that questienSis acknowl-
edged. want to know what differ
ence there is with reference to the i'm
portance, and the necessity and the prac-
ticability of union on the question OF
amnesty and on all other questions; and
I want to know whetherait would not be
much easier, instead of more difficult,
to shake hands for everything and to
agree upon everything thanitp keep up
wall of division about. eanlethiflg about
which we do agree, and tosshake hands
upon some other things about which we
also agree? saw the. e.other day state
ment in the speech Of a gentleman,
which was reiterated in almost the same
words on the same day in the speech
of another prominent gentleman, both
of them Irish Nationalists. They both
referred to the fact that it was quite
useless to be discussing the differences
of FIVE or six years ago; that they were
not concerned with FIVE or six years ago
or with five or six years hence, but that
they were concerned with the present;
and the recommendation from both these
different quarters was that we should
unite in the present. aEree with that,
and think you agree with it. The de-
sire is that we should unite, but unite
not for any single purpose, but for all
those purposes upon which we agree,
and in respect to each one of which our
union is essential to success. This les
son has been taught us by bitter exper-
ience. We have seen the change in the
attitude and tone of both parties to-
wards us; we have seen. the change in
the attitude and tone Of our own people
here; we have seen the change in the
attitude and tone of friends and synpa-
thizers not of our race abroad; we have
seen the change in the attitude and tone
Of Irishmen abroad. All these are warn
ings and lessons to us. They teach us
one tfing-the importance OF united
Irish party.