OCR Text |
Show Davitt Tjas Resigned j Wis Seat in Parliament : j London, Oct. 25. Michael Davitt. Irish nationalist member for South Mayo, announced in the house of commons com-mons today that he would resign tomorrow to-morrow as a protest against the Boer war. Mr. Davitt denounced the jingo press and said the war for the meanest and most mercenury aims would be known as the greatest crime of the century. cen-tury. He declared that if he had been offered home rule and an Irish republic-he republic-he would not have accepted them accompanied ac-companied by the condition that he vote for a war bill. " As a protest he would ask to be relieved re-lieved from attendance in the house. He had been in the house for five years, trying to obtain justice for Ireland and he left it convinced that "no cause of justice and right would have the support sup-port of the house unless backed by force. During the debate on the second reading of the appropriation bill James H. Dalziel, liberal member for Kirkcaldy, Kirk-caldy, expressed the opinion that one of the greatest difficulties in arriving at a settlement with President Kruger had been that rightly or wrongly, the president had believed Mr. Chamberlain, the British secretary of state for the colonies, and Cecil Rhodes were identical. identi-cal. He added that Mr. Chamberlain had given grounds for this belief by suppressing telegrams, whereupon the colonial secretary tartly intervened saying: say-ing: "I have never suppressed telegrams. I have not got them." Mr. Chamberlain also denied that he had refused to see Dr. Montague White the agent of the Transvaal who, the colonial secretary added, had never applied for an audience. audi-ence. The speaker, William Court Gully, intervened in-tervened at this juncture and declared all references to such matters were out of order. The pugnacious spirit animating the public has reached the legislators. Apart from the diversions created by Mr. Davitt there was a lively scene in the house between Brown Clark, radical radi-cal member from Caithnes, ex-agent of the Transvaal and Major Rasch, con- servative member for the south division '. of Essex. Mr. Clark denied the statement that he (Clark) was in the Boer camp at the time of the fight at Majuba Hill, and characterized the assertion as a "sample of the misrepresentation now prevailing." . Major Rasch promptly retorted that his statement was made on the authority author-ity of Mr. Clark himself, who told him so years ago, adding if Mr. Clark again denied the statement he, the major, would take the first opportunity of repeating re-peating the statement to him outside of parliament, when he could take what steps he liked. Sir William Vernon Harcourt, the liberal lib-eral leader, said he desired to again call attention to the provocation of the secretary sec-retary of state for the colonies (Mr. Chamberlain) during the negotiations, and in his speech at Highbury. Mr. Chamberlain replied, repudiating the intention to be provocative, and saying he only intended to be plain and free from ambiguity. He added that he only followed in the negotiations, the principles observed by all statesmen during the past ten or twenty years. There was a time, he explained, when diplomacy was regarded as given to statesmen to enable them to conceal their thoughts. That might fairly be called the "old diplomacy" which, he said, "I absolutely repudiate." "People." he continued, "are entitled to demand a clear expression of views and he asserted there was never slightest slight-est justification for the statement that President Kruger had been in doubt." Mr. Chamberlain then said: "Our object, methods and determination were to carry out these objects. It was necessary nec-essary to impress upon President Kru- ger the seriousness of the step he was I called upon to take, and the " consequences conse-quences which would follow any mistake mis-take on his part. It was not decirable to include this in an official dispatch collated col-lated with stiggestions and indications of opinion, but semi-official warning was frequently conveyed in a speech. A similar warning was given by Lord Salisbury to the sultan at the Guild hall banquet, and I am still absolutely unrenentant. "Respecting today's speeches, they are simply a rechauffe of old arguments argu-ments from Irish members hose boast is that they are England's enemies, and from the radicals who, in principle, oppose the war." Regarding Mr. Davitt, Mr. Chamberlain Chamber-lain said he recognized that he had hitherto discussed the matter moderately moder-ately but sincerely. "And," he added, "I would pay the greatest attention to his arguments if I did know he would use precisely the same arguments in regard to any British war which are based on his enmity to England." Mr. Chamberlain then said: "What would have been the Irish argument ar-gument in the Spanish-American war in which Spain showed herself infinitely infinite-ly less capable of defending herself than the Transvaal" Here William Redmond, Parnellite member for East Clare, shouted: "The Transvaal did not blow up your warships." war-ships." Mr. Chamberlain continued: "The great, almost determining contest between be-tween the United States and Spain was fought without the loss of a single American. "We have never denied that the Transvaal was a foeman worthy of our steel. Not only was the disparity between the forces in the Spanish-American Spanish-American war as great as those now engaged, en-gaged, but the contention of the United States and their right of interference arose from the fact that at the same distance from their territories there was oppression, not of American citizens, citi-zens, but of another race and people, and justified the intervention of the United States in the mind of the civilized civil-ized world, or at any rate, in 'the eyes of Englishmen and Irishmen. "But we are interfering in behalf of our own people. It is perfectly certain that Mr. Davitt, but for his hatred of England, wo.uld sympathize with us as he does with America." Mr. Chamberlain then replied to the criticism of his not accepting the mediation me-diation of Mr. Hofmeir, the Afrikander leader, pointing out th vt while he believed be-lieved Mr. Hofmeir was sincere, yet he could not forget that when President Kruger made "absolutely illusory proposals pro-posals for a settlement," Mr. Hofmeir was perfectly ready to accept them. President Kruger misled -Mr. Hofmeir in promising him proposals wrhich differed' dif-fered' materially from those he really presented. "There has been on the part of the Transvaal crookedness altogether incomprehensible in-comprehensible if they desired a settlement," settle-ment," continued Mr. Chamberlain. "I believe that from first to last President Kruger never intended to give anything any-thing approaching equal rights to the white races, or any acknowledgment of British supremacy. War, therefore, was inevitable. "There has been an enormous strain upon us. We are called upon to bring the war to a quick conclusion and send across the 6ea a force such as no nation in history ever before sent. This is entirely due to the preparations which ! made the Transvaal an armed camp, and which not only secured it a defensive defen-sive position, but enabled it to take the offensive against the large force now engaged. "Such a thing could not be continued forever. We have needed a permanent force of 25.000 in South Africa. We are told we shall lose South Africa. Our foreign friends are convinced of it. Yet they are not happy. Such predictions were made before, and were even current cur-rent in the days of Elizabeth. "But I am not alarmed. n- - Teutonic people cannot hold in subjec- I ti6n another great Teutonic people, but j this has never been our course. It is impossible to "pretend that the Dutch, at Cue Cape are crushed by our rule, i when they have all the rights E"glir;h- i men possess, and even individual cases are pe. flitted to tal!: and write treason. trea-son. "Whatever may be the result of the war and the premature talk of the result re-sult from the present war. does anyone imagine that we shall fail to drr for others what we claimed for ourselves, or refuse equal rights to the Dutch in the Transvaal, which they refused to u?.?" The house, by a vote of 224 to s, passed the second reading of the appropriation ap-propriation bill. I |