" Having inserted in Monday's Courier an article from the
Spectator, in which some remarks were made on Sir H. Parnell's conduct in reference to the ballot, we hasten, in justice to that gentleman, to insert the following para- graph, in reference to the same subject, from the Dundee Advertiser. It com- pletely exonerates Sir Henry Parnell."
This is from the Courier of Thursday ; and precedes a few passages culled from a longer article in the Ministerial Dundee paper of the previous Friday. The article in the Dundee paper could not be, and was not intended as an answer to our " Hints to Constituencies," which the Courier quoted from this journal on Monday; but had reference to one published the week before, which our evening contemporary did not copy. The Morning Chronicle inserted nothing whatever on the subject, till yesterday ; when it too must needs " hasten " to do "jus- tice " and to "exonerate," by a ready and conspicuous quotation of the one.sided garblings. Such conduct is characteristic of the Chronicle. The Downing Street scribes find it extremely inconvenient to state both sides, and the main facts in a controversy.
" He (Sir Henry Parnell) has practised no evasion, but has acted through. out the affair in the plain and straightforward manner natural to his character. He told his constituents that he hoped Ministers would make the Ballot an Open question, but that if they did not, he (Sir II. Parnell) 'could not vote fur it. Can any thing be more explicit? Sir Henry Parnell has acted ex- actly as he said he would act, and as any high.minded man would have acted under the circumstances."— Courier.
It was stated in the Spectator two weeks ago, that Sir Henry Par- neU avoided any direct pledge to vote for the Ballot unless it were made an open question ; but he nevertheless aimed at convincing the electors that it would be made an open question, and that" his name would again appear in the division-lists during the approaching session of Parliament as a supporter of that measure." ro the Political Union be said- " He consideled that the security and existence of a Liberal Government depended on the Ballot being carried. * * * Reasons were given him for refusal, [to make it an open question,] which he hoped could no longer be +urged."
On the hustings he said-.-
"1 trust that as the circumstances of Ministers are changed, this and other great questions will be made open questions."
By these expressions, and others already quoted in this journal, Sir Henry must have intended to create the belief that the change at Court would be followed by a more Liberal policy in the Government, and that he should be allowed to support the Ballot. Says the Dun- dee paper, as quoted by the Courier and Chronicle- " There is no proof offered in support of the assertion that the Ballot was made an 'open question' by the Government. The votes of Sir Hussey Vivian and Mr. Steuart must have been given in opposition to the wishes of the Cabinet ; and the reason why.the usual consequences have not followed s,:mains unexplained."
We never pretended that the question was made an open one "by the Government ; " nevertheless, it is undeniable, that Sir Hussey Vivian and Mr. Robert Steuart opened it for themselves ; and we opined that Sir Henry Parnell might have opened it for himself, If he had been as sincere as those gentlemen—if he had not, though doubtless in the abstract much attached to the Ballot, loved place and patronage more. The onus lies with Sir Henry Parnell, to prove that he could not do that which was done by Sir Hussey Vivian and Mr. Robert Steuart.
" But the understanding which existed betwixt Sir Henry Parnell and Iris supporters is shown also from the fact, that no requisition to resign his seat has, since the division on Mr. Grote's motion, been attempted, or, if it has been attempted, it has met with too little support to encourage going on with it. The Spectator is under mistake in stating that the requisition signed by the eighty-eight electors went the length of asking Sir Henry Parnell to resign. It was addressed to Provost Kay ; and its object was stated to be • to eonsider the recent conduct of the Member for Dundee,' and particularlyhis ;tbserrs05 the Ballot division."—Dundee Advertiser.
It is a sufficient reply. to this quibble, to quote the resolution passed by an overwhelming majority, in spite of opposition from Sir Henry's partisans, at the public meeting summoned to consider Sir Henry par, nell's conduct, "particul«rly his absence on the 13.illot " That this meeting call on Sir Henry Parnell to resign his seot for Dundee, that the electors may have an opportunity of returning a luau who will truly represent the opinions of the community.'
This is not all the evidence of the dissatisfaction of Sir Henry par. nell's former supporters. Mr. Synion, who seconded Sir Henry's nomination at the last election, concludcd his temperate and courteous letter to the Spectator last week with these decisive words— "1 feel convinced, however, that on a fitting occasion, the constituency of Dundee will not be found wanting in their duty ; and that the time will come when their choice will exhibit this in a j'airer way than when it lay between, Tory and a trammelled Representative."
Previous page
