LABOUCHERE'S OPINIONS.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XIX, Issue 20, 13 February 1891, Page 31

LABOUCHERE'S OPI N I ON S.

HONESTLY, I (IVuth) have not the slightest doubt that Mr.'Parnell is mad. There is no other way to account for the wild and reckless fashion in which he is going on. He must by this time be aware that the vast majority of the Irish H >rae Kulers are determined not to allow his personal ambition to wreck their cause. His latest craze is that the majority of his former followers in Parliament have, with Mr. Gladstone and the English Liberals, been hatching for years a plot to supersede him as leader — s ome riduced by vanity ; »om» by hatred ; soms by envy ; some by ambition ; and some •' by baser motives,'' whatever this may mean. His latest maoifesto hto th>j bill-side men— te, to the Fenian*, who are requested to s>oou\ "Hurrah for Charles Ml wart Parneil,"' an i not to give up the atoiesaid Charles Stewart to ttie Saxon wolvls. wmo howl io 1 his de*t uetion. All this ih entirely inconsistent, not only wit i his own past, but wnh his san'ty.

I was of opinion, when tr c O'Shea verdict was given, tha' Mr. Parneil's private morality ramer concerned the Irish than us. I thought the Iri«h Parliauientan ms wise to dit-pose him from the Leadership when it became c ear that a large English v, te woaJd be lost to Home Rule if th.s were not done. I was confirmed m the wisdom of this course by what followed : by the Irish Bishops declining to accept his leadership, and by his own egotistical and scandalous conduct. I, therefore, cannot be accused ot lookm" at the issue with prejudice or sentiment. I want Ireland to get Home Bule. With Parntll and without the English vote she will not get it. Without Parnell and with the English vote, she will. With me. in politics, principles aie everything — men are mere counters, f should denounce my i eat friend if he stood 10. t'e way of the triumph of my political principles, and I should make common cause with mj greatest enemy if I fiought that he c uld give clhcieut aid to make them triumph. Mr. Parnell might bo the best or the worst of men In either case I should wage war ag-unst him were he to stand in the way (as he now doe*) of the success of that Home liule which is one of my political principles. In the 81 Parliament I voted again and again witn Mr. Farnell and agnnst Mr. Gladstone, because I thought thismtst conducive to the success of Home Rule. lam now with Mr. Gladstone and against Parnell, for preci-ely the same reason. I recommend to the Insn th's practical mode cf recognising the exigencies of politics.

Air. Parnell is going from bad to worse. His speeches are beneath contempt. He is appealing to tne anti-English fee.ing which it was his boast that he had put an end to. and, in order to do this, he sticks at no falsehood re-pectiue Mr Gladstone or ms o*n lieutenaDts. I understand that his main tullowing consists of the publicans aod tlnir bangerF-on, publican* and sinners being now his chief support rs. A though he cannot toucn the Paris money, there is above £l'U UOO hauked in nis name in London over which be bf^^absolute control. Ibis vi mty was placid in his I ,mds aa chief 01 ice Parliamentary Party, and if he acted honourably, he woul i not draw upon it to fight for his own ban i againsc the majority of that party, but he appeals lost 10 all sense of decency. A considerable portion of this money, it is understood, was spent, to work up his reception in Dublin, and a further portion is bomg expended in Kilkenny. He in however, doomed. Tue Irish are generous an 1 impulsive, but they are realising that their god is made of clay Everywhere thty are falling away from him, and the Kilkenny election, will be his tulip dr grau,