« НазадПродовжити »
could have been propounded, and that if the This is quite insufficient, and he does well not to Irish Members had once admitted that the land go into further details. But it is sufficient that lords' debts stood on the same footing as all he proposes to start Ireland as a bankrupt other debts, their position would have been out against her will. And then he mildly remarks, flanked and the social order of Ireland would “I should like to give to properly constituted have been sacrificed to maintain the disorderly local authorities a practical interest in the element--the landlords-in power. As to the matter.” We shrewdly suspect that by “properly second point, if Mr. Chamberlain had been constituted,” Mr. Chamberlain means “constipresent in the House, he would have known tuted of landlords,” who of course would not rethat the Irish deliberately helped the Govern quire Mr. Chamberlain to give them a “practical ment in the progress of the Land Bill, and interest” in the old business of collecting 'rents. rather than lose the measure, abstained from Matters would be simply as they are, only rent raising any debate on the atrocities of Glen would know no modification through individual beigh and Bodyke until it was passed. And mercy. But if he means by "local authorities," lastly, as to the first point, the Parnellites con real genuine Irish authorities, does he suppose fessedly disliked Mr. Gladstone's measure, but he will ever give them a “practical interest” in accepted it with Home Rule rather than lose carrying out a measure which would ensure their that great concession. They hoped to pay ruin, and which would be enforced on them the interest on British credit from the taxes against their will ? They will justly take the of Ireland now devoted to the army and first opportunity to repudiate debts which they police. This Bill was much more objection have not incurred. And the outcome will be able to the English than to the Irish. As chaos. to the Land Act of 1886 being “the most
Then Mr. Chamberlain proposes that the liberal and most generous that has ever been English Parliament should spend large sums of offered to the tenants of Ireland by any Parlia
money on public works in Ireland. Thousands of ment,” Lord Salisbury himself defended it on
pounds have been voted for the same objects in the ground that it was only an extension of the
the past, but somehow such sums are always Act of 1881, while Mr. T. W. Russell, in the
misspent, because the Irish are not consulted in Times, proclaimed its utter uselessness to the
the spending of them. The money is given to the tenant farmers.
landlords to administer, and most of it remains Again, Mr. Chamberlain takes the flattering in their pockets ; or it is given to the Castle unction to his soul that the Liberal Unionist and spent by them in improving landlords' party alone are to be thanked for the Land Bill demesnes. As long as the Irish Government is of 1887. Here he confuses the real cause with the estranged from the people, so long it is imincidental cause. The Irish party having possible that that Government should act in worked up the steam, the Liberal Unionists | the interest of the people even in the spending supplied the piston-rod. If the Irish party had of money. Change the Government and then opposed the Bill, nay, unless the Irish party had the money will multiply a hund redfold in the pressed it pertinaciously ever since last Novem spending. Such is the strength of governber, of what use would the Liberal Unionist ment by the people, and such is the weakness pressure have been? There would have been no of a Government estranged from the people. Liberal Unionist pressure. There was no But Mr. Chamberlain's main point-his everLiberal Unionist pressure last November. But
repeated cry--was that if Home Rule was to the real cause of Mr. Chamberlain's bitterness
be conceded at all, a separate Parliament must on the subject of this Land Bill is probably to be
be given to Ulster. We are loth to believe that found in the chill reception given by all parties
Ulster, even if she were unanimous against to his bankruptcy clauses.
Home Rule, would be willing to desert the • A still more chill reception has been given to remaining "loyalists” in Ireland and leave his land proposals. And not unnaturally. Mr. them in a minority that would almost render Chamberlain proposes to “pledge or pawn” them powerless in the Dublin Parliament. Dr. Ireland's contributions to the national exchequer Kane denies it, and Dr. Kane is the leader of and the local taxation of Ireland, in order to pay the Ulster Orangemen. But Ulster is not the landlords “a ransom" for their property. unanimous. So far from being unanimous against Home Rule, there is a majority of infamous—comparison of Irishmen to HottenMembers returned by Ulster in favour of Home tots. The qualification for having a voice in Rule, and the number of voters on either side the disposition of Ireland's future is to be, is as nearly as possible equal. Mr. Chamberlain according to Mr. Chamberlain, foreign blood. could not deny this. But he tried to evade it The only part of Ulster to be considered by making a distinction between the Ulster politically is that part which is not native but of the plantation and the real Irish Ulster transplanted, and therefore alien. This arguinto which the “mere Irish” were driven ment refutes itself, and along with itself the at the time of the plantation. Even in the proposition that Ulster should have a separate Ulster of the plantation there is a large number Parliament. Mr. Chamberlain must find some of Home Rulers, but let that pass. This corner more cogent argument. If that be discovered of Ulster Mr. Chamberlain calls “political it may be acted upon. The principle of Home Ulster.” What can he mean by this ? Why, Rule is one question, and the formation of that no Irishman can be a politician—that the districts for its application is quite another, to be fact of being Irish disqualifies a man from any considered in accordance with local circumpolitical right. This is surely the reductio ad stances. But Mr. Chamberlain has failed to absurdum' of Unionism, and can only be make out any case for giving Ulster a Parliaparalleled by Lord Salisbury's famous—or rather | ment separate from the rest of Ireland.
DISESTABLISHMENT. At last this question is fairly on the rails of the their tastes and talents. It is only by such a Liberal programme, at least, so far as Wales division of labour that the party will be able to and Scotland are concerned. One of the heaviest get through its work. weights on the spirits of real reformers during The case for Disestablishment in Wales the last twenty years has been the discourage
was admirably put by Mr. Stuart Rendle, M.P., ment which Liberal leaders have poured on the
who said that, question of Disestablishment.
“In the year 1838 it was stated in the House of The pluck, energy, and determination of Commons by Mr. Benjamin Hall that three-fourths Wales has overcome the reluctance with which of the revenues of one of the dioceses was ab
sorbed by sinecures, absentees, and members of party men entertain new ideas. The experience
the family of the bishop. In 1879 a great Church of 1885 has contributed to this result. In order Congress was held at Swansea, at which it was to mitigate opposition, Mr. Gladstone then with stated by clergymen that five-sixths of the Welsh
speaking people of Wales were not in the Church, drew the question of Disestablishment from the
and Lord Aberdare had said that Wales would programme of the Liberal party, and on doing have lost religion altogether had it not been for so he discovered, what always happens in such Nonconformists-(cheers)—and that the establish.
ment had killed the Church in Wales. (Renewed cases, that the exhibition of the white feather,
cheers.) In such circumstances how could anyone while it paralyses friends encourages and reasonably hope to re-establish the Church in stimulates opponents. The supporters of State Wales ? But it was said that she should have a
place for repentance, and should be allowed time endowments at once became more active and
to re-establish herself in Wales. There were two more unscrupulous as soon as they saw the considerations which he wished to submit to hesitation of the Liberal party.
them in regard to this matter. In the first place
the vacancy had been filled. It was a sad picture It is hard on Mr. Gladstone to have to pre
to look upon the betrayal of Wales by the Church. pare and carry through a measure of Disestablish Surely no church in the world had ever betrayed ment. He should now reserve himself for the
its trust as the Church in Wales had done. (Hear,
hear.) But there was another and a brighter Irish question, and leave Disestablishment, the
picture by the side of the dismal picture, and Land question, and the Franchise, each of them | that bright picture was the redemption of Wales specifically in the hands of a suitable leader who
by Nonconformity.". would gather round him active supporters. This statement cannot, in the main, be disThis would enable the Liberal party to utilise puted, and it forms a case which must not be all its power, and employ its various members denied. Surely fifty years is long enough to on those points which may be most suited to endure wrongs which are both practical and sentimental. To see the revenues which belong the people being deprived of their rights. In to the people, and which should be applied carrying out this and all other reforms, let us see to their edification, either withdrawn or applied to it that no unnecessary suffering is caused, let in a manner positively offensive, is an insult and all deserving cases be considered. But the an injury which no people should endure. It young and the rich who are now connected with is satisfactory that the Liberal party have now the doomed establishments must be left to take taken up the question, but let the people of care of themselves. The property of the people Wales depend in the future, as they have in the must not be devoted to the maintenance of such past, upon their own right arm, which alone will as are able to work or to those who have ample get them the victory. So long as men endure means of their own. In the discussion of oppression, so long will it be forced upon them. questions involving personal interests, the Liberal leaders find it more easy to leave Government are always placedat a disadvantage, abuses untouched than to provide for their | as there are numberless advoc ates of personal removal unless an abundant force is supplied by claims but no one holds a brief for the public. local action to overcome the resistance of the The Welsh and the Scotch M.P.'s should act privileged classes.
on the public behalf and see to it that the As Mr. Gladstone said at the Memorial Hall public are not defrauded. in London, “ The same men who oppose justice and Home Rule for Ireland, oppose the adjust The poor need never want if they only vote ment of taxation in London.” And the same
straight for the Tory candidate like men-or mendi
cants. At a meeting of the guardians at Sevenoaks men will oppose the disestablishment of the the other day, the vicar justified a parishioner's church in Wales. Whatever kind of justice we claims for poor relief, on the ground that he " was a seek, we find opposed to us the universal
good Conservative and voted at the last election for
Mr. Mills." Truly it is a good thing to find a upholders of privilege. In whatever direction candid man sometimes. radical zeal may be manifested, we may regard The Pall Mall Gazette comments thus upon the ourselves as part of the same great army purchase of Parliament Hill by the Metropolitan opposed to, and opposed by, the men who
Board for £305,000 :-"Consider for a moment
what the process is. Land, except in the immeunscrupulously appropriate to themselves what
diate neighbourhood of towns is now almost belongs to the nation.
unsaleable-witness the articles in the Times on Wales has won its position by Plans of
some Northumberland estates. Owing, however,
to the exertions of Londoners, land in London is Campaign. Nothing would have brought her almost unbuyable. Whereupon the said Londoners cause to the front but the resistance to the pay
have as a fine for their said exertions to tax them
selves in order to give two individuals a handsome ment of tithes, which has been so strenuously
income for life. Under which circumstances it is manifested during the last two years. Tithes as not perhaps altogether surprising that people at present exacted are robbery, and robbery
should begin wondering whether the appropriation
by individuals of unearned increment' is really should be resisted.
part of the eternal fitness of things." It is curious to note that robbery by the
"It is no disgrace to go to jail for Ireland.” parson seems to excite so much more indignation
Such was the reply of the brave young Irish girl than robbery by the landlord. As a rule the when the magistrates at Taghmon, in County
Wexford, offered to take bail in place of sending parson does something for his money, while the
her to prison. It was a right valiant answer, and landlord does nothing whatever. However, we this little girl will give the watchword to her welcome the attacks upon and resistance to countrymen in their struggle against the forces of
oppression and disorder during the coming winter. robbery in whatever quarter it may appear. The
We prophesy that she has made a name for herself turn of the landlord will come. The battle in the annals of Ireland. What was this child's between justice and privilege will soon rage all
offence? She had used intimidating language.
A brave Government, indeed, that is afraid of the along the line.
threats of a child ! Foiled in its attempt to gag Of one thing we must be careful, that we are press editors, it turns to the more congenial task of not deceived. In disestablishing the Irish
gagging children! One of the chief effects of the
Crimes Act hitherto has been to enable the Tory church the public were deprived of nine-tenths
Government to keep this girl and a boy of fourteen, of their property. This must not happen in Wales together with two young men about twenty, under or in Scotland. The property in question belongs
lock and key for a fortnight. This is resolute
Government indeed; but there is resolution and to the people. Not a farthing of it can be ab
resolution. In a certain sense the Duke of Alva sorbed in "compensation" or otherwise without himself was a "resolute" man.
HOME RULE FOR ENGLISHMEN.
MR. GLADSTONE's speech at Nottingham on
Tuesday was an admirable indictment of the Government policy in Ireland. We were not surprised that the Tory papers on October 19th could do nothing but groan and sigh over the "progressive deterioration" of Mr. Gladstone as exhibited in his great speech on the evening before. But in our opinion this “deterioration” has not quite gone far enough. His great point was a distinction between the administration of law in England and in Ireland. We are far from saying that this is not so to a large extent. It is very largely true that in England those who obey the law are' in harmonious relations with those who administer the law. There is no difference of race between those who obey and those who administrate, and the centralisation is less. But there is to a large degree a difference of interest, and though the centralisation is less complete, the same evils result from it, in so far as it does exist, as result from centralisation in Ireland or in Russia. Take for instance London, where the police is centralised in the hands of the Government. Here we have peaceable processions attacked and disorder simply created by the police.
The beginning of the Monday “riot” is described as follows in the Standard:
" An attempt was then made to form a procession, and, headed by the red flag, they began to move out of the Square through the immense concourse of people then assembled. A strong force of police was immediately mustered on the pave. ment outside the Square, and an attempt was made by the police to restrict the men within its limits. The head of the procession succeeded at last in getting on the pavement, and had made its way as far as Charing-cross, where there was a complete block of traffic, and the mounted policemen then rode forward and attempted to clear the crowd. In front of the Golden Cross Hotel a panic seemed to seize the crowd, and they pushed in all directions. A woman was knocked down by one of the horses at this spot. An indescribable scene followed. The crowd backed up against the iron palisading in front of the Golden Cross Hotel, and one of the horses of the mounted police came in violent con. tact with the iron palings in front of the hotel, which broke in two pieces, and fell in. A number of people also fell. The police did their utmost to drive the crowd into the Square, and in the mêlée which followed, the black banner carried by one of the processionists was broken."
The clearest point that this evidence brings out, is that the police began the disorder by attempting, without any shadow of legal justification-to keep the crowd within the Square. People on the omnibuses cried shame on the action of the police, which was analogous to that at Mitchelstown, in pushing the reporter through the crowd.
Take again the description of the "riot" on Tuesday :
* The procession, whose leaders seemed to have no definite programme, but appeared chiefly anxious, if possible, to dodge the police, then suddenly swerved to the right, and a wild dash was made for a little iron gate that leads into the Bayswater-road. The inspector on duty endeavoured to force the people to leave the Park by one of the principal gates, so that he might gain time to strengthen the force at his command. A constable stationed at the gate closed it for a moment, but quickly opened it again when half a dozen mounted men rode up to it. This manœuvre was quickly effected, but in the meantime the people had thronged to the gate, and when the police rode in a wild scene ensued. Forced back by the horses, and crushed forward by the constantly. increasing numbers in the rear, the crowd became panicstricken, and struck out wildly. The mounted men pushed their way on, and were obliged to use their fists, and, in one or two instances, their staves. After a moment of wild struggling the crowd fell back with a rush, and about a dozen men went down, while others were knocked down by the horses."
Here is another instance of disorder provoked by the guardians of order. What right had the police to insist on the crowd leaving by one gate rather than another? What could be more unwise than to pen a crowd of people into a corner and then to charge them on horseback?
In all these cases we see that the first push was given and the first blow struck by the police themselves, and all the evidence of bystanders goes to prove the same thing. A clergyman who "happened to be in Trafalgar Square on the first day states that he saw five policemen attack a single man. One man took either a leg or an arm, and, as the fifth had nothing better to do, he punched him in the back with his knee. The police evidently had instructions to create a riot. Now for this action we do not blame the police themselves, they were doubtless acting under orders and were shamefully over-worked. Nor do we blame the authorities so much as we blame the system which gives them the power. We blame a system which gives power to commit such grave blunders in the streets of London to men who are not controlled by London, and have no sympathy with those sufferings of which the demonstrations in Trafalgar Square and Hyde Park are but the outward and visible sign. Our argument is that these things are a symptom that the difference between the administration of law in Ireland and England, though existing wherever the administration of the law in England differs also from that of Ireland in the other respect of being controlled by the people themselves instead of being under Government, does not exist where the same conditions prevail. In our provincial towns this latter difference does exist-the police are under control of the municipalities—and consequently the other difference follows—the police are in harmony
with the people. But in London the police are know anybudy who asks when he sees a centralised in the hands of the Government, | mushroom, “To whom does this belong?" and the consequence is that the police of For not asking this question, but proceeding London, like the police of Ireland, are out of immediately, like all of us, to pick them, a small sympathy with the people. Where the causes boy was fired at by a keeper and severely are " similar, the effects are similar also. wounded. The case against the keeper was Thus Mr. Gladstone's distinction between dismissed by the local magistrates! While Ireland and England requires considerable another man who was accused of picking these qualification. “Home Rule” for London is mushrooms was punished with a fine by the only less necessary than “Home Rule" for same bench! This is only paralleled by another Ireland.
case in which a farmer was fined ios. 6d, for And it is not in London alone that English- picking some nuts in a wood which adjoined men have no control over their own executive. the field he occupied. Home Rule then is All through the country districts, whose voice is obviously required in the counties, only less less heard in our national councils than that of than it is required in London and Ireland. almost any other part of Great Britain, the Difference of race and religion and want of even police are centralised under the control of the a central parliament obviously make the Home Secretary, and the administration of jus estrangement between the law and the people in tice is almost entirely in the hands of the Ireland far greater than it is in England. landlord class. The consequences are that And for this reason, and also because our injustices are perpetrated scarcely less gross English country people are more patient and than those which were detailed by Mr. Glad long-suffering than their Irish brethren, we stone in his speech at Nottingham on Tuesday. hear far more of the wrongs of Irish peasants The Shrewsbury newspapers recently reported than of English. But none the less do they two cases which showed the absolute want exist, and it is all the more our duty to give of harmony between the law and the people. voice to them that they are of themselves so A landowner had a field in which there voiceless. Mr. Gladstone must not forget was a great quantity of mushrooms. Every England in remembering Mitcheltown. Home one knows the delight of picking mushrooms Rule should be the object of Englishmen as well in the country, and we should like to as of Irishmen.
THE DAUNTSEY CHARITY.
It will be within the recollection of the readers | communicating to you the result of my interview of the DEMOCRAT that, during the last session, with the Master and Wardens of the Mercers' Parliament rejected a scheme proposed by the Company, whom I found extremely well-disCharity Commissioners for the reorganisation posed and anxious to arrange a settlement which of the Dauntsey Charity. The objections urged should be satisfactory to all parties and should against the scheme were that out of £120,000 conduce to the permanent benefit of the people only £30,000 were reserved for the Charity, of West Lavington. The points which I have that of this sum the greater part was to be kept chiefly in view are, first, the necessity of employed for a middle class school, and that obtaining from the Mercers' Company a much the parishioners, who had enjoyed a free school more liberal grant for the purposes of the Charity for 340 years, were in future to pay school fees. than was proposed in the rejected scheme; and, After the rejection of the scheme the parishioners secondly, the maintenance of the endowment for were at a loss to know how to act. The Charity the benefit of that class of the population for Commissioners would not move, and no one whom it was originally intended. else could do so. In their difficulty the parties I laid before the Master and Wardens the interested applied to Mr. Chamberlain, who following suggestions, embodying the views has given vigorous attention to the matter, and which I had previously expressly to you and to it now seems likely that a really good scheme the other parties interested in the matter. will be adopted. Mr. Chamberlain has ex I proposed, first, that the Mercers' Company plained his action and suggestions in the should set aside a capital sum of £60,000, or the following letter. His proposal to establish a annual interest upon it, for the purposes of the Technical School of Agriculture will be of the Charity. I proposed this sum on the assumption greatest value in the locality, and may con that the present value of the property was tribute largely to bring about that intelligent £120,000, and was not likely to increase for a interest in the cultivation of the soil which is long time to come. I believe, however, that the so urgently needed.
real value is somewhat under this, and it is, Highbury, Moor Green, therefore possible that the Company may object Birmingham,
| to surrender so large a sum, which is, as you are
Oct. 21st, 1887. aware, twice the amount arranged for under the MY DEAR SIR,-1 have now the pleasure of rejected scheme.