Nelson Chronicle, Colne Observer, and Clitheroe Division News. — 1891-10-16 (Nelson, Lancashire, England)

OUR MEMBER.  WE may congratulate ourselves as much its our member, upon the latter's restoration to health. Sir C. KAY-SITUTTLEIVORTR his resumed the discharge of his duties as a politician and a citizen, and has evidently lost none of his old fire and enthusia.sm. His visit to Nelson this week was, of course, nonpolitical, liat his presence must arouse the latent enthusiasm of his followers. Last week he was busy at Manchester in the political area, and did good service in assisting Mr. C. P. Sewn. to reduce by more than on-half the POSTMASTER GENERAL'S small majority in North East Manchester. For his good work there Sir Iic.IITRED has had a silly complaint laid against him. It is said that Sir UGILTRED was allowed to be returned unopposed in 1886. on accepting (Mee in Mr. GLADSTONE'S Government, and therefore he ought to have been the last Drill to offer any opposition to the re-election Of Sir JAMES FERGUSON last week ! The absurdity of this statement is so apparent that we are almost ashamed of insulting the inte,ligence of our readers by offering- any reolv. Sir reatTer.l) offered himself for re-election on April 19th, 1886, and was retoret-ct uaopposed ; the same result followed at the General Election of 1886. On each occasion Sir VI :HTRED announced his policy and programme, and these gained the unanimous approval of the electors. • What was Sir JAMES FERGUSON'S position? In 1885 he bid for and obtained the Irish vote. In 1886 he turned his coat. He went a good deal further though. He protested against Land Purchase, Coercion, Dismemberment of  the Empire, sze On this policy he was returned. But what happened? lie supported permanent coercion; he voted for buying out Irish landlords with British credit; he applauded the degrading system under which 'WILLIAM O'BRIEN came to be insulted in a free city like Manchester; he tried to down the Irish nation on forgery; he supported the brewers' compensation proposals; he— will it be believed ?—he dismembered the empire by an ignominious surrender to Germany of lleligoland. The Foreign Office— of which he was the representative in the House of Commons—so blundered their work that we set our colonists in Newfoundland in a rage, offended the United States, gave grem umbrage to Italy, and came near a disruption with France. At the end of this— which is but a small part of the long list of follies of the present Government Sir JAMES FERGUSON asks not only for a renewal of confidence in himself, but also in this blundering and bungling Government which years ago lost the confidence of the country. It would have been suicidal and cruel to have given Sir JAMES FERGUSON a walk-over. It would have been cowardly of Sir UGHTEED not to have used his well-known intluence with a Manchester audience, to secure the condemnation of such a chapter of failures The seat was not won. With 2000 I removals from the constituency almost entirely of working men—that was not expected. But the result justified the opposition and confirmed the lesson of the byeelections. The tide is still flowing—flowing in the direction of Irish liberty and the t:i u:nph of the democracy. 

Article type: NotIncident