The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1906-07-21

sirablc on every ground that it should
be settled as quickly as possible. The
speech was frank and sympathetic,
with note of earnestness and sim
cerity which commended it to the
house at large. and the Irish party
in particular.
Mr.. VIM. O'Bricn very heartily en-
dorsed everything that Mr. Il. w. Rus
sell had said of the barren results of
Royal Commissions in Ireland. But.
although convinced of their utter
worthlcssnrss, this Commission. "in-
spirch as it was by the Chief Secre-
tary, he hoped might by some pOssi-
bilitN justify the hopes centered in it.
IL was not his method to approach the
solution of the problem He would
abolish the Congcstcd Districts Board
altogether and hand over its 100000
pounds Il year to the Estates COM
nlissioncrs to enlarge holdings.
Mr.. Dillon spoke in the debate later
III ,he evening, and showed once more
his marvellous grasp of the whole sys-
tenn of Irish land tenure in it's manv
phases and complicated Details The
debate lasted the whole of the sitting
ana shortly before II o'clock Mr.. Conor
okelly withdrew his amendment by
leave of the Committee and the vote
was agreed to.
question time yesterday was marked
by I'm incident partly regrcttable and
partly ludicrous. Mr. Ginnell is IL VERY
Industrious interrogator of the Chief
Secretary, and has apparently suffered
considerable disappointment in his
search after information. Mr. Bryce,
who personally doubtless desires to he
perfectly frank, and straightforward
often has answers given to him in
which hands skilled in framing cvasivc
replies are exercising their art with
Increasing nudacity. Mr.. Ginnell was
lhhlscrcrt enough to lose patience yes
terd;ly ana he asked MIR. Bryce. in
tones of hcrrbity. whether he was
ashamed to read such "dishonest" an.
Swrr* to the house. Immediately there
WAS II shout of protest, and the Speaker
as in duty bound. informed Mr.. Gin
nell that dishonest was an un-Par-
liamcntary expression. There were
cries Of Withdraw" but Mr.. Gin
nell, with Il determination worthy of
a better cause. did not withdraw. This
was the unpleasant part of the Incl
dent, for Mr.. Ginncll had evidently no
backing from his colleagues of the
Irish party. Then followed the ludi-
crous part. Up jumped Mr. Healy and
fervidly assured Mr.. Bryce, on behalf
OF some members of the Irish party,
that they had no sympathy with the
action of Mr.. Ginncll. This was an
entirely gratuitous, supernuous inter-
vcntion on the part Of the member for
Louth, but Mr.. VIM. O'Brien, anxious
to add IL hue to the rainbow, took it
upon himself to give a similar assur-
ancc on the part Of three -fourths"
of the party. Why three -fourths?"
There was no evidence that any men,
Der of the party approved Of Mr. Gin
nells method Of airing his grievance,
though, happily, it is not customary
among them to turn upon a colleague
when he has put himself wrong In the
house.
Saturday Morning, June 30.
Mr.. Birrell put down q new clause
yesterday, carrying out the promise he
made to the Irish party on Clause 2.
The new clause provides an appeal by
either the local authority or the man.
ayers of trustee school to the Board
Of Education where they cannot come
to an agreement as to the terms on
which a school is to be taken over. The
clause also does away with the judi
cial body Of three members to which
such appeal was originally to be made,
and substitutes the Board of Educa-
ton for it. The position of the Irish
party in regard to this proposal is per-
fectly clear. If the Government had
made Clause 4 acceptable to the Cath
olic schools this new clause would have
been welcomed, but as Clause 4 is not
acceptable this further move in the
direction of bringing compulsion to
bear on the voluntary schools only