BRITISH POLITICIANS.

Taranaki Daily News, 7 November 1916, Page 7

BRITISH POLITICIANS.

SOME NOTED LEADERS* MR. PARR'S DESCRIPTION . , Some impressions of the House of Commons, and of certain of the leading British politicians, whom he heard during a debate there, were given by Mr. C. J. Parr, M.P., in Auckland last week. The debate Mr. Parr heard was, he said, on the Irish question. Mr. Dillon, a tall, thin man, was attacking the Government for its actions since the rebellion. He never saw a man who used such voluminous notes when speaking. Mr. Dillon had a sheaf of some 40 sheets of paper, which, when finished with, he discarded, till the floor.all around him was littered with them.

Mr. Asqiiith was the next speaker, said Mr. Parr, He used few notes, and made absolutely no pretensions to declamation or emotional oratory. His style of speaking was quiet, passionless, and reserved, and lie used no gestures. Bis voice was extremely low, but could be heard distinctly, being strong, deep, and vibrant. His speech on the occasion was a quiet, but irresistible argument. He overwhelmed his* opponents, not by appealing to their passions, but by the use of cold and forceful logic. Mr. Asquith dominated the House by his impassive intellectuality. He could never be a demagogue, nor a grdat popular favorite, but one felt that behind that emotionless face a great brain was at work. His gift of plain yet eloquent speech was unsurpassed in the whole House. An iceberg of a man, with the most capacious and most capable brain in Britain, he gave one tha idea of an immense reserve of strength behind his speech. Mr. John Redmond, the Trlph leader, who was the next speaker, looked ill and worried, said Mr. Parr, and spoke with much more restraint than Mr. Dillon, and with a force and effectiveness Mr. Parr had never heard excelled'. He used copious notes, and his gestures . were many and dramatic. John Redmond was, without question, one of the greatest orators in Britain, and withal possessed one of the keenest, quickest, and most subtle intellects in Parliament. Sir Edward Carson, who followed in the debate, Mr. Parr described as the most striking figure in the whole House. He had an extraordinary face. He did not look mor V than 40, though, Mr. Pansupposed, lie must be nearly CO. But it was not the apparent youth fulness in the man that appealed. It was the great powerful jaw, the resolute chin, and the keen black eyes which arretted attention. Sir Edward spoko only for a few minutes, but a pin could have been heard to drop. Everyone- sat up, leaned forward, and listened. He had no notes; his language was a model of brevity and lucidity. There was sincerity and deep eoiivktfqn in his speech. He was a man not afraid to tell the world what lie thought. Mr. Parr said he looked upon it as a great privilege to have been able to listen to four such great men in one afternoon. ~.