MR FORSTER’S ATTACK ON MR PARNELL.

Dunstan Times, Issue 1089, 13 April 1883, Page 4

MR FORSTER’S ATTACK ON MR PARNELL.

The 1 following telegrams have appeared in the American papers:— London, February 22nd, In the House of Commons to-day, the Right Hon. Wm. Forster defended his own course previous to his resignation of the Chief Secretaryship for Ireland, The Prevention of Crimes Act, he said, was not accepted before the release of the suspects, but ho had advised it as urg nt. But for the Phoenix Park murders Ireland would therefore have become -ungovernable. The recent disclosures had increased the suspicion that the Land League was connected with the outrages. The public expected that Mr Parnell ■would have elucidated this point. No mere disclaimer would have been sufficient. He charged Mr Parnell with heading an organisation which had started an agitation that promoted outrages and incited to murder. Mr Parnell, he said, had reaped advantages -from the agitation. He did not p'an the outrages, but connived at their commission. Mr o‘Kelly shouted, “ It's a lie,” several times. He was named for •suspension, and his suspension was ordered by a vote of 305 to 20. Mr Forster resumed, and reiterated Lis charges against Mr Parnell, quoting from that gentleman’s speeches, in which he -had said that murder was unnecessary. He said the wretches who committed the Pooenix Park assassinations had not acted on the letter, but according to the spirit of these speeches. Until Mr Parnell expressed regret and repentai ce, he could not communicate with him. A feeling is now rising, even in Ireland, against the agitation. Mr Parnell and his friends have been unveiled atd unmasked. There were loud cries for Mr Parnell, but he did not move, Mr O’JJonneH, on attempting to interpose during the speech, was ruled out of order. The Marquis of Hartington expressed surprise at Mr Parnell’s silence, which he said was an admission that a prima facie case had been been established against the Irish leaders. The Government, he declared, had no intention of introducing any measures for an extensive change of policy with regard to Ireland that would be likely tofarouse strong party feeling, and absorb a large portion of the time of the House, JUespite the repeated challenges of the Government, he «aid, the Opposition had formulated no direct specific charges against them. Ifo asked theIHouse whether, seeing t- f at there was ■ a general agreement with regard to the policy of the Government, it would -choose Mr Gorst’s amendment, which, ; if carried, would .have the effect of removing the Ministry from office. Mr Parnell moved to adjourn the •debate, which was agreed to. Febiuary 23. There was much excitement iu the House of Commons ac the opening of the session this afternoon, as it was expected that Mr Parnell would speak in answer to the charges made against him by Mr Forster yesterday. A large number of persons were in the lobbies, being unable to find room in thn House. The strangers’ gallery and the peers’ gallery were filleu. The seats of all the members were reserved. Mr Parnell said the utmost he desired to do was to make his position clear to the Irish people at home -and abroad. Mr Forster, he said, ought to be ashamed for traducing him. He declined to reply to Mr Forster’s questions, and charged that gentleman with having asked him (Mr Parnell) to inform against his associates. Mr Parnell said he did nob care to impress his opinion on the House, or on England, If Mr Forster had believed that articles published in tlie Irish World were likely to incite crime, why had he not stopped the circulation of that paper ? He compared the responsibility of Mr Forster, who had read the articles, and believed what the result would, to that of himself, who had never read them, though they were now brought against him. Mr For ster had unfairly singled out the name of Sheridan, as mentioned in the “ Kilmainham Treaty" negotiations. Why did he suppress the names of Uavitt, Egan, and Boyton, who were also mentioned as likely to endeavour to prevent outrages in Ireland 1 Mr Forster exclaimed: “ They were not mentioned to me " Mr O'Shea, member for Clare, asserted that they were mentioned to Mr fforster