With regard to the two limitations which stand in Parnell's name, and
which they ask for, I told Healy that the wording of the limitations
could not be used, as it would have a bad effect to say in an Act
that the non-payment of rent is not an offence. To this he assented,
and is quite ready to accept any words, taken from the Act of '75 or
from anywhere else, which will cover the limitations. Would it not
be as well to have the words ready, and to let Parnell have them, or
at least to be ready with the substituted words when Parnell's
amendment comes on?
There is a clause about exclusive dealing. When the suggestions
which I submitted to you were being discussed by Parnell and Healy,
they were very anxious to include Davy's amendment in regard to
exclusive dealing, substituting for "dealing with"--"buying," by
which they would have excluded a refusal to buy from Boycotting. I
got them to say that this was not to be pressed if Government
declined to accept the amendment, so I did not trouble you with it.
Late last evening Parnell wanted to insist on it, so I appealed to
Healy. He said that they were bound not to insist on more than had
been submitted to you, as this would not be honourable, and therefore
all trouble on this head is avoided.
Of course they will in the House divide on some amendment in regard
to exclusive dealing, as a protest, and they may make one or two
speeches, but there will be no obstruction, and I see no reason why
the Bill should not be through Committee (notwithstanding Goschen's
gloomy prognostications) in a few days.
It would, I think, very much tend to aid matters if Harcourt could in
the course of discussion state, that in all cases a barrister will
sit with a residential magistrate. He has already said that there
will be an appeal to Quarter Sessions, which in Ireland means an
appeal to the County Court Judge. But some of the residential
magistrates are very foolish persons, and all are regarded as men in
the landlords' camp.
Also, is it not possible to arrive at some clear definition as to
what is an unlawful association? Parnell says that it is left now to
any residential magistrate to decide the matter. He suggests that
only such associations shall be unlawful, for the purpose of the Act,
which are proclaimed as such by the Lord Lieutenant. {186} But
provided that there be a clear definition, he does not care for any
particular wording.
Parnell and Healy request me to say that they are very grateful to
Mr. Gladstone for meeting them half-way, and they seem only now
anxious about "treason felony." As Herschell told me that he thinks
everything necessary will be covered by the word "treason," I hope
that this matter will also be settled satisfactorily.--Yours truly,
H. LABOUCHERE.
P.S.--Parnell would not like any one but you and Mr. Gladstone to
know about his dispute with Egan, and the embargo on the League
funds, except in a very general way.
10 QUEEN ANNE'S GATE, June 24, 1882.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account