But the only effect was to embitter Mr. Parnell, who
in his speech first travelled out of the line of the discussion to offer an explanation as to the meaning of his denunciations of landlordism as the representative of the English connection, from which it appeared that he did not object to the supremacy of the English Crown, but only to the supremacy of the British Legislature ; and then went on to justify rebellion, whenever rebellion was likely to be successful,—a part of his speech to which Sir Stafford Northcote afterwards drew attention, pointing out that in tone it had assumed the air of abso- lute equality between Mr. Parnell and the Crown, On the motion for the adjournment of the debate, Mr. Parnell broke out into violent comments on Lord. Hart- ington for opposing the adjournment, and then indulged.
in an altercation with the Speaker, in which he accused Mr. Brand of unfairness to the Irish Members, and was warned that he was disregarding the authority of the Chair. Mr. McCarthy's amendinent was again debated during the whole of Tuesday, the only remarkable declaration being Mr. O'Donnell's, that the Irish Members were prepared for any- thing that might happen, " though the axe might await them in the lobby." In the lobby, however, the 37 Members who voted for Mr. McCarthy's amendment appear to have en- countered only the tellers, and no Rotors. Against it voted 201 Members. On Wednesday and Thursday nothing of the least importance was said on the amendment relating to the Irish borough franchise, and on Thursday Mr. Parnell's state of mind had become so much milder, that ho made no objection to the immediate taking of the report. Was this a recoil like the runner's who retreats to take a long run at a leap ? Or is Mr. Parnell embarrassed by the secession of Mr. Shaw and his colleagues from the Irish party under his leadership P
