OCR Text |
Show THE BECOXSOLTDATION OF THE HOME ETJLE PAHTY. j : i It is an ill wind that blows' nobody ' any good. One outcome of the war In South Africa has been to effect -what : earnest negotiations, prolonged for up- ! ward of nine years, have failed to ac- ! cernplish. to-wit: The reunion of the. Irish National party, w hit'h wa.? split j into fragments in December, 1S90, and which has been since disqualified by the weakness- bred of discord, from rendering- any substantial service to the home rule cause. Just before the opening open-ing of the eo-.sion of parliament on Jan. SO, Irish member.?, representing- not only the Parnellites, but both sections of the anti-Farne'litcs, m"et and unanimously passed a resolution that the Irish Nationalist Na-tionalist party f?lhould be reconstructed on the lines laid down by Mr. Parnell in 1SS5-JHV lines which should as-sure independence in-dependence of ail British political par ties,' and confine Nationalist efforts to thc single aim cf securing a measure of heme rule at least as wide as was embodied in the bills of 1886 and- 1893. Mr. John E. Redmond, Mr. John Dillon and Mr. Timothy Healy were prepent at the meeting. The latter moved that three whips be elected for the reunited party, and it ic? understood that Mr. Redmond will be its first parliamentary chairman. Now that the long breach in the Nationalist Na-tionalist ranks has been repaired, it ' may be interesting to recall the cir-" cir-" cumstances. under which the schism took place. A review of the facts will show that the deposition of Mr. Parnell was due to Mr. Gladstone's demand, a demand which, undoubtedly, could, be justified on moral grounds, but which, . as events have shown, was a grave political po-litical mis'take. The resultant rupture of the Irisli Nationalist party, the bitter bit-ter contest of the two factions at the ballet box, and the conspicuous part which the Catho'ic hierarchy and clergy felt constrained to take on behalf of the anti-Parnellites, shook the belief of British liberals in the competence of Irishmen for self-government, alienated the Engli':i Nonconformists' whom Mr. i Gladstone 'had sought to propitiate, and prevented the liberal chief from gaining gain-ing in the general election of lS92'a majority ma-jority sufficient to overawe the house of lords. To di!i?uade the peers from, throwing out hie second home rule bill and compelling- a new appeal to the electors?, Mr. Gladstone needed to pass that measure by a majority of at least 100; as it turned out, he was unable, even with the help of both Nationalist factions, to secure a majority of more than forty. The latter majority he could have secured, and 'he did se'cure, against the wishes of the EngHph Nonconformists, Nonconform-ists, who, as the event proved, were 1 much more deeply shocked at the revelation reve-lation of the political power possessed by the Catholic Church in Ireland than they had been by the moral lapse of which Mr. Parnell was convicted in connection with the OShea divorce case. The result 'mi.ght have been predicted pre-dicted by thof.'3 who remembered the course pursued by 'the Nonconformists in 1SGS. At that late, and for .some time previously, James II had been a man of irreproachable morality, but he i was an avowed Catholic. On the other I hand, William of Orange, who became i presently William. Ill of England, j brought a Dutch mistress i h him, an! cpenly installed her in London. Nevertheless, Never-theless, he was the champion of Pro- j teetantism in Europe, and, as such, he was acclaimed with fervor by Anglicans ' and Nonconformists alike. From the j moment that the control of the domi- nant faction in the Nationalist party I nassed from, Parnell. w'ho wns a Prn. testant, t the Roman Catholic Church, the cause cf home rule was dead, go far .a.3 Eng'lioh Nonconformists could destroy de-stroy it. This result of Parnell's disposition from the leadership was, from the out- set, foreseen by some astute conservative conserva-tive onlookers, and it was feared by many Irish nationalists, who, in the end, cast their lot with the anti-Par-nell faction. A few data will show how exclusively the schism in the home rule party was due to Mr. Gladstone's interposition. It was on Monday, Nov. 17, 1890, that a decree nisi for the divorce di-vorce of Captain and Mrs. O'Shea, on the ground of the latter's misconduct with Mr. Parnell, was made. On the ! very nxt day there was a meeting of j the Irish National league in Dublin, j and a resolution pledging the meeting i to stand by Parnell, notwithstanding j the proceedings in the divorce court, i was carried by acclamation. On Nov. 19 Mr. T. P. O'Connor, Mr. William j O'Brien and Mr. John Dillon were in-; in-; terviewed in the United States, whither they had gone to raise funds for the nationalist na-tionalist cause, and all three proclaimed proclaim-ed their unfaltering allegiance to their chief. "I can see nothing," said Mr. Dillon, "in what has occurred to alter the leadership of the Irish party in the house of commons. A change would be a disaster." Mr. William O'Brien said: "Speaking as an individual, I will stand .firmly by Parnell and there is -no reason rea-son why I should not." AVith them Mr. I P. O'Connor concurred: "Mr. Parnell Par-nell is the greatest parliamentary leader that the Irish party ever had. , His disappearance from that post would create dismay among the Irish : nationalists." On the same day, Nov. ' 19, Mr. Labouchere, the well known : British radical, declared that it was ; not for the English to decide who the Irish leader should be: "This concerns the Irish alone. My advice to Mr. Par-noil Par-noil is that he should not be diverted from the task that he has set himself, to free his people, by anything that has occurred or maj occur." ' ; On Thursday, Nov. 20. there was a great meeting of Irish nationalists it the Deinster ball. Dublin. Mr. Timothy Healy and Mr. Justin McCarthy were present. The latter proposed the fol lowing resolution, wnicn was carried by aoc'amstion: "That this meeting, interpreting the sentiment of the Irish people that no s:de issue shall be perm'tted to obstruct ob-struct the progress of the great cause of home rule for Ireland, declares that, in all political matters, Mr. Parnell possesses the confidence of the Irish nation, and that this meeting rejoices at the determination of the Irish parliamentary par-liamentary party to stand by their ' leader." j Speakirg to this resolution, Mr. Mc- i Carthy said: "I ask you. suppose a man has gone ! morally wrong in some personal relation, rela-tion, is it the least reason why he should fail in his duty to lead his peo- j pie in pome great question of national t and public importance? Can we say to j that man: 'We can do without you? I We know we cannot say it; we cannot ' possibly say it. WTe shall say to him: ! 'We recognize no reason why you j should be exempted from the great public duty rrf leading the Irish party and the Irish people1 to a public victory." vic-tory." ,. . Mr. Healy. followed: i "I would say this further, that we I must remember that, fir Ireland and for Irishmen, Mr. ParnHl is less a man than an institution. We have under the shadow of hisi name secured for Ireland a power and an authority in the councils of Great Britain and the world such as we never possessed before: be-fore: and, when I see a demand made for his retirement, and resignation, I ask you to remember the futility thereof. there-of. Were Mr. Parnell tomorrow to resign re-sign his seat for Cork, he would in-atantly in-atantly be re-elected. I say we should be foolish and criminal, if we, the seasoned sea-soned politicians who have been able to watch the vagaries and temnests of political paisagesv if we, upon an occasion oc-casion of this kind, at the very first blast of opposition, surrendered tha I great chief who has led us so far forward." for-ward." On Nov. 22 Mr. Jacob Bright wrote to the Manchester Guardian: "You appear to recommend that Idr. Parnell should retire -'for a time from I public life. I take a different view. I think it is his duty to remain at his post. If a man commits a grave fault, the best atonement he can make is to i do all the good he can in the direction .clearly indicated by his own talents and experience. The place where Mr. Parnell can render service to his own country and ours is in the house of commons." On Nov. 24 Mr. Iliingworth addressed a public meeting in Bradford. He said: "Mr. Parnell has rendered great service ser-vice to the Irish people and the cause of home rule. He has piloted ho-me rule nearly into its haven. Would the passengers pas-sengers of a vessel from America which had been skilfully manouvered through many dangers' and nav. rated through many storms dupose the captain while yet the ship had to be threaded through tha crowded sea and the Mersey because be-cause th-ciy heard on the yep age that the captain had been guilty of a moral offense?" Amid this course of friendly opinion some jarring notes were struck, conspicuously con-spicuously by the Rev. Hugh Price Hu&hea in the Methodist Times, and by Mr. Stead in the Pall Mall Gazette. Both took their ;tand on the moral question, and said, in effect, "Mr. Par-'nell Par-'nell must go." On Sunday, Nov. 23, the Rgv. Hugh Price Hughes asserted at a gathering at St. James' hill: "I have high authority for saying that Air. Gladstone will intervene, and 'that Mr. Parnall will recognize his voice as one to le Obeyed." On the next day, whveh was the day before the meeting of parliament, Mr; Gladstone? came to Ixmdon and wrote his famous' letter to Mr. John Morley. He announced in this fatoful document that he had arrived ar-rived at the conviction that "notwithstanding "notwith-standing the splendid service rendered by Mr. Parnell to h!s country his continuance con-tinuance at the present moment in the leadership (of the Irish nationalist party) par-ty) would be productive of cower quearees disastrous iiv the bigrhsst degree de-gree to the cause of Ireland." He added that "the continuance I speik of would render my retention ..of the leadership of the liberal party, based; as it 'has been mainly, upon the? presentation of i the Irish causo, , almost ai nullity."-Whilelr. nullity."-Whilelr. Moi'ley was in search of Par--nell to show him Mr. Gladstone's -manifesto, the Irish nationalist members met on the afternoon of 'Tuesday, Nov. 25. at committee room 15 in the house of commons, to elect a sessional chairman, chair-man, the constitutional title of the leader of the Irish parliamentary party. par-ty. The re-election of Mr. Parnell to the chairmanship of the party was proposed pro-posed by Mr. Sexto n, seconded by Colonel Col-onel Nolan, and agreed to amid Uud applause. ap-plause. Mr. Parnell thanked the meeting meet-ing for the fresh proof of their confidence confi-dence in him, and snid that, in response to thoir unanimoui desirei, he would continue to discharge the duties' of leadeir. On the morning of Nov. 26 Mr. Gladstone's Glad-stone's letter was published. It at once caused a split in the ranks of the Irish parliamentarians, and, at another meeting heid by them, Mr. Parnell was deposed by a considerable majority from the chairmanship. This was don2, although those who did it had been reminded re-minded by an old Fonian leader: "You have all condoned Parnell's moral offense; you have had your I Leinster hall meeting, your cables from the American delegates, the meet- I ing of the parliamentary party, the enthusiastic en-thusiastic re-election of Parnell as chairman. And now, in an instant, and at the bidding of an Englishman, you ! eat your own words and abandon your I own chief. What do you think every self-respecting man in the world will ' say of you when you have done, this thing? Why, that you are cowards; : that you have no' self-reliance; that ! you do not deserve freedom. I think I j am better affected toward Mr. Glad- stone and the liberal party than any of you, but Parnell is of more importance ! to Ireland that Mr. Gladstone and the liberal, party, and, for that matter, than the Irish party, too, all put to-gsther. to-gsther. Let him go and home rule will go with him for this generation." A similar opinion was expressed by a distingu'shed tory: "I cannot conceive why the Irish gave up Parne.ll. He was everything to them. He was the center of the whole enterprise, and the idea that things can go on after his overthrow exactly as they went on before seems to be ab"olut:ly fa'uous. I cannot think, even now, that Gladstone wished Parnell to go he must have known too much of the man and too much of the movement. I think Gladstone was fcrced into the pit. Yoi win remember remem-ber the meeting of the Naitonal Liberal Federation at Sheffield on Nov. 21? That was the beginning. John Morley and .Harcourt was the-e. The Nonconformist Non-conformist parsons got at them, frightened fright-ened them, and then they came up to London, saw Gladstone, frightened him and persuaded him to the course he took. The parsons frightened them, nd they frightened Gladstone. Cowardice Cow-ardice sheer cowardice was the cause of Parnell's overthrow." Of course, nobody disputes the sincerity sin-cerity of Mr. Gladstone's devotion to the home rule cause, or denies that, when he demanded the retirement of Mr. ParneU, he acted for what he be-beved be-beved to be the best interests of the liberal party and of Ireland. The event, however, was to show that he belief was not well founded. Parnell has long been in his grave, and for many years the blight of discord,- which did not stop with the original orig-inal two-fold division into Parnellites and anti-Parnellites, has i cursed with impotence the Irish -party. The curse has now been lifted, ;and the closing year of the' nineteenth century has brought the day of a new hope to Ireland. Ire-land. New York Sun. |