The Irish standard., 1902-05-10

sfsss IlAe, tHe Cllel secretary nlu long
catalogue of really serious cases of
boycotting before him, and most
powerful combination in all parts of
4 the country to deal with. In the speech
then of the present First Lord of the
Treasury introducing coercion. he said
ii his justification for it was that there
was steady and alarming increase Of
Il boycotting and refusing to pay rent.
VI do not say that the grounds for the
coercion of 1887 We're sufficient, but
1 these were infinitely stronger than any
n grounds attempted to be put forward
3 for the present action of the govern
ment In the worst old days all Eng
lish ministers felt themselves bound
to make out a great case before they
abrogated these important rights.
4, Even in the days of the Duke of Well
1ngton. Lord Peel, and Lord Russell,
before any reform bill was passed,
none of these great statesmen would
\ have dreamed of proposing coercion
for Ireland on such miserable case
4 as has been made tonight. (National-
n list cheers). ask what has taken place
4 In Ireland to justify the change of pol
I. Icy on the part Of the chief secretary?
Il We were referred in his speech to four
/ facts Only-the action of the Associat-
ed Estates, an increase in the number
OF meetings to denOunce individuals,
matter published in newspapers in
y tended to bring terror into mems
minds, and a small growth of boycot-
Z ting. l will deal with these one by
# one. The action of the Associated
Estates-we have it on the word of
u Judge O'Connor Alorris-was the di-
rect and natural outcome of the action
\ Of the government itself. 1t is not q
strike against rents nor :ln attempt to
defraud any man of his just rights. 1t
( was a natural offer on the part of the
people to buy their farms ut the same
price as fixed by the government after
bargain with Lord Dillon. That is
not very grievous crime. The agi-
tation and discomfort were gravely in
creased by the fact that there is on
the De Freyne estate an agent-Mr.
4. Flanagan-whO has treated the peOple
very llarshly and unjustly. Hear,
hear). Only yesterday, at French park,
/ q number of actions taken against the
tenants by this agent were dismissed
by the magistrate owing to their in
justice. The whole of this agitation
has been characterized by the greatest
peacefulness. No crime and no intimi-
dation is alleged, ana, so far as the
!. Associated Estates are concerned,
. there is not Il shadow of ground for
coercion. Let me come now to the in
( crease in the number of meetings. Can
there be anything more vague alleged
as a ground for coercion than the
holding of meetings to denounce inui-
viduals? Is that unknown in this
country? (Nationalist cheers. If the
chief secretary was ut Blenheim last
year he would have heard some pretty
lively denunciations of individuals. l
. don't think | ever read of meeting
which the Colonial Secretary attended,
at which he did not denounce some in
/ dividual and sometimes this is empha-
+ sized by the danger of paving stones
1 and brickbats and bludgcons. (Nation-
alist chcers,. have denounced the
Chief Secretary ut several meetings.
4 Is that Il crime? | admit that il your
language is an incitcmcnt to violence
/ against an individual it is I, crime,
! and you should be properly tried for
it. But the Chief Secretary did not say
that ut these meetings individuals
were denounced with Il view to viu-
lence being used towards them. We
have his word that no evidence exists
lin Ireland us to the matter put in
newspapers for the purpose of bring
Il ing fear into mems minds; that is Il
most extraordinary charge to make in
!. view of what has been said in English
4 newspapers. When threc-lourths OF
the press of England has been engaged
in melting mobs to hunt and in,jure
those whom they are pleased to call
pro-Boers, it appears to me this is
8 q cool proposition OH the part of the
right honorable gentleman. The law
should be the same for newspapers in
4 Ireland us it is for Great Britain Then
/ come to the last ground on which the
Y right honorable gentleman bases his
II change Of policy-thc increase in boy
y cotting. Anything more ilimsy and
ii preposterous than THE ease made by
A the Chief Secretary on this point 1
a have never listened to- l noticed that
4 the right honorable gentleman was re-
sfluctant to make any distinction be-
Z tween the cases of totally and partially
A bOycotted persons. and vet it would be
atmpOssible to cXaggcratc the impor-
tance of the distinction. Qrish checrs).
The right honorable gentleman says
there are .fifty-one eases altogether of
saboycotting, including all classes of per-
4 sons, and Oh that basis alone he ,iusti-
4 fies this policy of coercion. When l
II asked him how many We're totally boy
4 cotted. and how many partially. he
Y said there were between five and seven
totally, and the remainder partially
boycotted. I admit that total boycott