Untitled

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 463, 16 April 1890, Page 4

Anti-Home Rule organs have made vio lent efforts to show that the report of the Times ’’-Parnell Commission was, on the main points, unfavourable to Mr Parnell and his friends, and practically confirmed the accusations of the “Times,” except as to the Pigott forgeries. Yet a virulent AntiParnellite print, the London “ Referee, has the following editorial remarks upon the result of the inquiry “ Short of an absolute acquittal on all counts which was, by the way, impossible—a finding more favourable to the Pamellites than that of the three judges who sat in commission could not have been anticipated. Mr Parnell actually does get acquitted of every charge in any way imcortant that affected him personally. There is no use in blinking inexorable facts, or in endeavouring to make out that the ‘ Times ’ in any way made good its accusations. The • Times ’ fell into a trap, and flounder as it might, and did, it has not managed even yet to get clear oi it. What has been proved against the Rarnellites everybody knew before the ‘ Times made its gigantic muddle. Whatever was new is shown to be untrue, or at best is unproven.” When we remember that the three judges, Hannen, Day, and Smith, were one an Irish landlord, another an English Catholic, and the third a Liberal Unionist, it is not likely the Commissioners will be taunted' with partiality, to Home Rulers, or the cause they represent.