“Dillon's Reception."

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 374, 7 November 1889, Page 2

“Dillon's Reception."

[to thb editor.] Sib,—Now that everything haa been finally arranged for above, and the Committee have at length oome forward with a programme, I shall with your permission further refer to I the object of Dillon and Co's mission to I these colonies, and the cause which I Gisborne people are asked to contribute to I the support of. I ** Local Self Government " is I believe the [latest name by which the Irish Delegates I choose to designate their movement, whilst I amongst a people whom they know an as la rule loyal to the British Crown, and who ■would not be at all likely to oontribute [towards the success of the Separationist [policy advocated by Mr Dillon and his [colleagues on Irish platforms. [ Local Self Government “ ia a plausible name, simply got up with a view to the | enlistment of colonial sympathies, and the acquirement of colonial dollars; the agitation is still the same which Dillon and Co. have again and again pledged themselves to continue until the last link of the chain which binds Ireland to England has been broken, and until the Irish people have obtained complete independence from British rule, without which they would never be pacified. The men who carry on that agitation are still the men whom the G.O.M. he turned his coat) described ns "steeped to the lips in treason,” " marching through rapine to the dismemberment of the Empire,” &c. It suits the Delegate’s book in these loyal colonies to disclaim all ideas of Separation, but'they can only throw dust in the eyes of those who have never troubled to keep themselves abr- ast of the situation. Despite anything it may suit to say to ths contrary, separation is ths object aimed at) in faot it has been openly stated by witnesses on the Parnellite side before the Special Commission that Jforo*

if there wks the slightest hope at Its knowledge of their impotenee h, ° g ’ rh '° h k “P* ‘ hem ,rOm w«nid‘ t '• olrll w ‘ r ' b y Whloh th *y ZSll. h 7 nothing to lose and might probably gain in such a aoramble. Assuming, however, that Looai Self Government is the ta*th.‘ r S IU / mM “ on - '• ‘fre sassy * p p' ied ’pwisiiy to Ireland! Under what disabilities, socisl, political, religious, or sduoational, do its T no Jil| UbOr? L“ y ' •®Pb‘«O*«y. none. I will even go far her, and ntssrt that in the matter of legislation that country is exceptionally favored. 7 Its land laws provide ample eecnrity for the protection of the tenant, even to partial confiscation of) the landlord sjproperty • education of a high class Is within the Asch of all, there (■ religious equality tor everyone and last, but not least, freedom of speech and action.

In what other country in Europe would an army of oarpet bagging agitators be allowed the freedom of speech which has characterised the uttersnoes of the ParnellltM during the progress of this agitation?— utterances amounting in many instance to incitement to rebellion, murder and outrage. How would they fare in some of the continental countries, Germany or Russia for instance! Badly, I think ; much worse then under the rule of the Sassenach. There is another aspect of the question which cannot be overlooked, that is, that the demand is not that of United Ireland. It is impossible, and I regret that it is so. to disassociate this question from 3ectari. anism.

The demand emanates from tbe Roman Catholic portion of its population, which is avowedly disloyal to British rule, while it is as strenuously opposed by the Protestants of Ireland generally, and Ulster specially, who have prospered nnder that rule. Ulster, which was st one time the most barren and disorderly province in Ireland, what is it nowln its capital city alone, hundreds of millions ot pounds ere invested, its manufactures are known in all parts of the world, its ships are daily in our ports, and its people are prosperous and contented, while cities and towns outside Ulster are decaying daily. If such prosperity is possible in Ulster, which has bed no exceptional legislation, it io also possible outside, but be that as it may, those who by their own industry have so prospered cannot be expected to out themselves off from Imperial control to cast in their lot with the impoverished portions of the country over which Parnell, Dillon and Co. assume to reign supreme. If there was now another reason against the Parnellite demand, Ulster is one unanswerable, and one that cannot and will not be denied.

I feel that I have already drawn this out too long, but as there are many people in Gisborne, who not knowing the true state of affairs, may be oajoled into giving their support, either moral or material, to the mission of the Delegates, I hare thought it my duty, to the best of my humble ability, to represent things ae they are. not as the Delegates say they are. It Is little short of criminal, In my opinion, to encourage in any way whatever au agitation which can only end In disappointment, and in the wake of which, with its twin brothers, the "Land and National League " have followed crime, outrage, and distress to thousands of misguided people. The sooner the agitation and the agitators are relegated to the obscurity from which they sprung, the sooner will the country be at rest and its people settle down as they eventually must. They will not go without a struggle for the simple reason that their bread and butter ia concerned, but go they must.—l am, Ao., . ... HIBSRNUK. [W e know of nothing to compel Hibernian or anyone else to oontribute to the fund which the Irish delegates are raising, Attendance at the meeting that has been called ia not compulsory, but we should advise the readers of the above to go and hear the other aide of the question. Fair play is a jewel.—Ed.'