The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1903-03-21

do not deSire-aS it is most earnestly "
be hoped that they Will not desire
take advantage of the point tnus en-
pressly left open to them, let US pass
to the two other ways of finding the
twenty seven and one-halt years Pun
chase for the landlords
3. AS between those two ways Oh
working ont the transaction, however
earnestly if is to be desired that the
second way, which is, OF course 'iie
more favorable to the tenants, may De
adopted. it would be nothing short oI
dishonest to state, or to imply, that lle
proposal by the government OF
Element on the lines of the third way
that which is the less faVoraple TO llle
tepants-would be in any sense a re-
lection of the conference seheme, Vi
would not be, on the. contrary, dlstiiice-
" within the lines of that seneme'
have now restated, in a somewhat
more compact form, what had nrst 10
be expressed much more diffusely 10
ma Ike it generally ineligible. In view
OF the resolution of the National d.
rectory, which have already quoted
/ have to add that if that resolution
was really meant to convey that an ar
rangement based upon the bringing UP
of the tenants payment to NUMBER
of years purchase even substantially
in excess of seventeen or eighteen, Is
to be regarded as further 'compro-
mise in the landlord interest or that
my explaining to the public that such
an arrangement is really within the
lines of the conference scheme is a
suggestion that "a further compromise
in the landlord interest" should be
made, or agreed to--the statement must
be set down as not only obviously, but
daringly, untrue.
One other matter undoubtedly calls
for notice. Mr.. I. w. Russell's wide
knowledge of the system of land ten
ure in Ireland not only in it's prin-
ciplesa but in its details, and his ad-
mirably businesslike method of dealing
with all public questions, are univer-
sally recognized in Ireland. Hence,
any statement of his in reference to the
Irish land question. and, more particu-
larly, any statement of his in reference
to the scheme agreed to at the Mansion
House conference of which he was
prominent member, is likely to attract
widespread attention, and indeed is GER
tain to be implicitly accepted by those
who are not perhaps capable, or at all
events are not in the habit, of looking
into things for themselves.
l have, seen in the nswpapers, within
the present week, two statements of
the conference, and l am bound to say
that from my general confidence in Mr..
Russell's accuracy of statement, these
statements of his went so far toward
raising a doubt in my mind as to the
accuracy of what have been publicly
stating for the past week or So that l
felt bound to read once more the report
of the conference with very great care.
Having done so, 1 can only say that,
unaccountable as it may well seem,
Mr.. Russell has quite misstated-every
one who has followed his public career
will know that mean he has quite I'M
Intentionally misstated-what was
done at the conference.
Mr.. Russell, referring to the scheme
OF purchase outlined by The O'Conor
Con, which would involve the payment
or an extension of the tenants yearly
payments over a period of 100 years or
SO. says:
The conference never contemplated
such thing. They especially dis
claimed it. They asserted that these
terms fhe terms agreed to at the con-
ference) for landlord and tenant would
require more at the hands of the state
than the mere use Of its credit"
Now, in all this, MIR. Russell, how
ever we are to explain it, is quite mis-
taken. He is wrong in stating that the
conference asserted that the working
out of it's scheme would require" any
thing from the state beyond the use of
It's credit: / have always quoted the
words of the conference scheme itself:
Ihis may involve some assistance
from the state beyond the use of it's
credit" me-
Inat, plainlBsiis a statement essen
ually different from what Mr.. Russell
AV1nnnfIU- hl1
tar from saying that a state grant
would" be required, the scheme, for
some reason, which, I must confess,
seems to me almost unaccountable, ex-
pressly avoided saying this Instead of
saying 1T, the conference would almost
seem TO have gone out of its way to
use an expression the presence of
which in the scheme I find it diff
cult to account for, if, indeed. it was
not inserted in the scheme by the as
tuteness of the landlord representatives.
with the view of securing that the
door should be left open-as If has in
fact, been thus left open-for the adop-
ton of some scheme such as The
OConor Don's, a scheme that appar-
emily might be worked out without
any grant from the state
But, however this may be, Mr.. Rus
sell, whatever he may have agreed to.
or whatever he may have thought that
he agreed to, will not find in the
scheme what he so strangely believes
to be asserted" in it, that the work.
ing out of the conference scheme
would require the aid of a grant
from the state.
Then Mr.. Russell goes on to say:
And every tenants representative
worthy of the name in Ireland would
resist a settlement on The O'Conor
Don's lines''
Mr.. Russell, of course, did not mean