LIBELLING THE KING.

Gisborne Times, Volume V, Issue 105, 13 May 1901, Page 2

LIBELLING THE KING.

SEIZURE OF THE “ IRISH PEOPLE.” DISCUSSION IN THE HOUSE. “ SCANDALOUS, SCURRILOUS, LOATHSOME ” ATTACK. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright London, May 11. The entire edition of the newspaper Irish People, the United League’s organ, has been seized. It contained a reflection on the King. London, May 12. The Times says the newspaper Irish People was seized after publication, and many copies had been sold. It contained a foul and obscene attack upon His Majesty tho King, in connection with Archbishop Vaughan and English Catholics recently presenting a loyal address. The libel was comparable in falsehood and bad taste to the worst outbreaks of tho French gutter-press during the Fashoda period. In tho House of Commons, Mr Wyndham said that the seizure was effected without warrant undor the Common Law, which authorised the preservation of evidence, and tho prevention of crime by further dissemination of seditious

libels. Mr John Dillon, in moving tho adjournment of the House, did not attempt to justify tho language used by the paper, but censured the suppression of freedom by the Viceroy of Ireland. Mr Wyndham was not the House of Commons, which was tho competent judgo of what was sedition. It was a question for tho Courts.

Mr Redmond, in seconding the motion, said that the Executive was in roalit;

attempting to suppress the United Irish League. Dir Wyndham, in replying, claimed personal initiative- and responsibility for the seizure. The publication, ho said, was n gross jscandal. One libel lie would not soil bis lips by reading. They wero outrageous, scandalous, scurrilous, loathsome, and false attacks upon the King, and tho offenders wore members of tho Houso. They would wound tho feelings of millions of tho King’s subjects throughout the world. Not only would tho Government suppress it, but it was tho duty of any loyal subject to intervene. Tho libel was couched in language fouler than any used abroad in regard to tho late revered Queen. A prosecution would, he addod, probably do more harm than good. CONTINUATION OF DEBATE. INDIGNANT SPEECH BY MR BALFOUR. REJECTION OF MR DILLON’S MOTION. By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright Received 4.39 p.m, May 12. London, May 11. In the debate in regard to tho paper “Irish People,” in tho Houso of Commons, Mr Balfour, in tho courso of a speech, asked, Is tho publication of an obscene libel a necessary weapon of political agitation ? Tho question was received with angry Nationalist protests. Mr Balfour, continuing, asked, Why, then, did what isd escribed as a leading organ stoop to tho use of tho foul, poisonous weapon of seditious, obscene libel ? Owing to his very high position, Dir Balfour said, the King was less able than any of his subjects to repel attacks. A gross offence against decency and morals had been committed. If the Nationalists were aggrieved, the courts were open to them. The suppression of nauseous attacks upon the private character of tho Sovereign did not affect the great and sacred cause of freedom of the press. Dir Asquith re-echoed Dir Balfour's sentiments. The motion for adjournment was negatived by 252 against 64. Ten Radicals voted with the minority. A number of Liberals and Radicals abstained from voting, objecting to Dir Wyndham acting judicially, and the police not being furnished with warrants. The bulk of the Liberals voted with the Government.

Tho “Irish People” has made a long series of attacks on tho Government and the Empire. There is a concensus of opinion that the latest article will create antagonism between the English Catholics and the United Irish League.