The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1902-03-14
BRITISHLEADER RELEASED
Cause for This Action by the
Beers Not Apparent.
Denied That Abandonment By the
King Of Proposed Trip to IRE
land Was Result Of Incident
in Commons.

London. March 1a-The following diu.
patch. dated Pret,ria, March "a. ha. bser
received from Lord Kitchener: .'csnsrat
Methuen was brought to Rlerksdorp to-
day. He is doing well. Everything possi-
BILE Is being done for him.
The War Secretary. Mr.. Broderick, an-
nounced In the House OF Commence to-
day that he understood that General lss
thusn, who was captured and severely
wounded by General Delarey, March Itch.
had been released and was expected to
arrive At Klerksdorp. southwestern
Transvaal. today. The Generals condi-
ton was favorable.
M. Broderiok added that the exchange
OF General Msthuen for Commandant
Kritsinger had not been Contemplated.
The trial Of the commandant had been
postponed because the consideration -
the evidence to be presented haA ueo
been completed.
The ofacial announcement yesterday Of
the abandonment Of the proposed visit Of
King Edward and Queen Alexandra to
Ireland. whereby the Ministers assume
the responsibility OF an imperial boycott.
ID quite unprecedented In form. and
causes keen discussion. the general tone
of which Ii interpreted as displaying pet-
ty spite and spleen. The suggestion
sought to be conveyed. both by the an
nouncsment itself and tho comment OF
the ministerial organs. that the decision
arrived at was directly due to the out
burst OF some of the Irish members OF
the House of Commons when the news Of
the disaster to General Methuen's coll
umn was -unoff1cially communicated to.
that House, IL declared by hostile critics
to be obviously false. as 1t was announce
ed weeks ago that the visit would be
postponed
These criticat also assert that there
seems good reason to believe that their
Majesties themselves all along desired TO
carry out the coronation visit, and though
taey have deferred IL on the advice OF the
Ministers. they have no intention of re-
lieving the latter of the onus OF a tactless
move. M
The Freemen's Journal. voicing the
Nationalist views. saying: The Min
listers have put veto on the intended
visit of the sovereign to a portion Of
his dominions. I'll would be difficult for
His Majesty to reject the veto of his
constitutional advisers, but il is plain
that he insisted that the responsibility
should be theirs and not his. His min
listers could not venture to allow the
King to see with his own eyes and hear
with. his own ears Of the barbarous
methods OF the castle and the deep resent
ment of his people. His presence here
would have been a sore. There was Inn
minent danger that his visit might have
converted him to Home Rule or confirm
ed his existing conviction. Therefore.
the ministers in their own interest and
fxfn ~ I'M hou a.
den the visit"
The London Times today prints q letter
dissenting from the suggestion that II
John Redmond had been in the House
OF Commons when some of the Irish men,
bers cheered the announcement OF Cen
eral Methuen's defeat and capture. he
would have rebuked his followers for
their outburst Of exultation. The writer
refers to the meeting at Chicago last
summer 'in honor of the Manchester
murderers," which Mr.. Redmond I'D
dressed and to the proceedings which
were officially opened by John II. Finer
ty." After quoting the resolution passed
at that melting and also referring to a
speech at New York. in which Mr.. Red
mond was quoted as advocating the hang
ing Of Mr. Chamberlain, the writer asks:
"Why should a man holding such opin-
ions restrain the rejoicing OF his follow
ers at British defeat?"
During the debate on the civil service
estimates in the House of Commons to-
day John Redmond, the Irish leader,
moved a reduction of the salary of ths
Chief Secretary for Ireland, George
Wyndham. and proceeded to incisively
critisize Mr.. Wyndhan's policy assert
ing that the latter was engineering con-
spiracy to misrepresent the condition Of
the country in order to give a colorado
excuse for coercion. Mr.. Redmond said
coercion would not kill boycotting. but
1t would exasperate the Irish people at
home and consolidate them abroad. He
sincerely hoped. however, that the Irish
would not be betrayed into the commits
sion OF crime.
Mr.. wyndham, In replying, said that
already a great many illegal acts had
been perpetrated in Ireland. He wishe
1t to be understood that he. both per-
sonally and officially WAS responsible for
whatever repressive steps were taken by
the government. He admitted that con-
stitutional right OF the people to assem-
Bile and proclaim their grievances, but
where crime was about to be committed
an assembly became unlawful and it was
the duty of the government to prevent 1t.
Mr.. Redmond's motion was rejected.