THE O'CONNOR MEMOIRS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20244, 2 May 1929, Page 10

THE O'CONNOR MEMOIRS.

BEMINISCENCES OF "T.P."

JIRISH PARTY AS FIGHTERS,

SKETCH OF JOSEPH BIGGAR.

" FATHER OF OBSTRUCTION."

(Copyright.) No. XV. The year 1881 was a marvellous year for the young and small ■ Irish Party. It, did very remarkable things at subsequent times in later epochs, but that year will always ictain its position as the high-water mark which they, or any other small Party, could reach in resolution. in tenacity, and in success. The Irish minority varied from 20 to 27; -it rarely got to 30. . . They could count on, as a rule, only 20 active members. Yet even this small, insignificant group were able to hold up an assembly consisting of 615 members, virtually united to a man against them, to thwart all the plans of a Ministry led by the • greatest Parliamentarian in the history of the House of Commons, backed by a majoritv of 100. increased at vital moments by all or nearly every member of the Tory Opposition. It was a fight of 20 men against nearly 600. One ot the great personalities in the mighty struggle of the session of 1881 ,was Joseph Gillies Biggar, the " Father of Parliamentary obstruction." There could not hav? been a more typical Beli'astmaj than Biggar. He was tho son of a very successful Belfast merchant. Hepry Lucy, in his days of violent vituperation, used to say that when JBiggar rose to speak there was a faint smell of a kippered herring! This was a rudo way of saying that Biggar was in the provision trade. Ido not think Kippered herrings, but rather cattle, sheep, and pigs wore the things he disposed of. Speech Carried in a Hat. It was in 1874 that Biggar was returned to Parliament for the County of (Javan. At no time had he the gift" of speaking. His speeches were just like his letters, terse, direct and busi-ness-like—great things in business life, but not good material out of which to make the eloquent and endless speeches which tho members of his Party were expected to deliver when our policy was that of obstruction. It was said that whon ho made his first election campaign he used to carry tho manuscript of his every speech in the inside of his tall hat. Mr. Biggar's physique was like his character in its extraordinary contradictions. He had a fine, well-shaped face, with regular features, a wellshaped nose, and very bright eyes; he had powerful limbs; but all this was spoilt by a prominent hunch back. JBiggar had also a great deal of the •*' nearness" of the tvpicai Belfastman of Scottish descent. Whenever we had to discuss the question of salary for a , very poorlv paid official, he was adamant against anv increase. Once we were determined to make such an increase u we could, even if it meant a long struggle. 'Fortunately, just as tho business came on Biggar fell in,io one of those deep slumbers which occasionally overcame him, and were the forerunners—though we did not realise it—of the sudden death in which his life unexpectedly ended. ,\Ve hurried up the proceedings, and by the time Biggar woke tho salary had been increased Man Who Scorned Blotting Paper.

An instance of Biggar's contempt for the natural pride very strong among Irishmen, especially among the poor, was narrated to me. Three-quarters of our Party had to bo assisted from our Party funds. This was a matter held so delicate and so sacred that very few of the members of the Party knew who were, and who were not, the recipients of this very necessary dole. ... . . There was a meeting of the party in the •Mansion House in Dublin during these [years to discuss the programme of the coming session. I was not there, but this is what occurred. Among Biggar 8 peculiarities was the practice of nev ® using blotting-paper. As treasurer ho drew out the cheques for the members ot the party and scattered them all over the desk in the Mansion House. This *r<i3 terribly humiliating to the poor 'allows whose pecuniary dependence was thus exposed. . . Here again comes one of the contradictions. He had a sister or two, and I have heard that when they spoke of his generous kindness to them they did so with tears of gratitude. At one time, owing to some trade complication, Biggar lost part of lus capital, and he resolved to meet these losses with a direct reduction of his expenses. Before be used to dine in the House, and even there the price of his dinner was not large. As part of his new economy liigear used to leave the House for an hour or so, walk across Westminster Bridge, and take his meal in one of the Tioor eating-houses in the somewhat squalid neighbourhood of Westminster Bridge Road. The Policy of Obstruction.

Another story I have heard of Biggar, which I will give, though it seems to mo rather incredible. He took it into his head that when he went to cattle fairs he was charged exorbitant pricc3 because of his notoriety. So he went to these fairs in disguise. The hunch on his back, as well as the constant portraits of him iri the papers, made such a disguise quite palpable. Biggar was the most fearless man 1 have ever known. It was almost incredible that this little hunch-backed man, Blow of speech, with no power of appealing to the House of Commons, should stand up there and continue unmoved when nearly 600 men were shouting words nt him of execration and contempt. One of the coercion bills to govern Ireland against her will was under discussion. Biggar got up and made a speech of four hours. This was really the beginning of the policy of obstruction which his party followed with such success years after. i It was Biggar, and not Parnell, who) was the true author of the policy of obstruction, though by a curious coincidence, this performance by Biggar took place on the night that Parnell took his seat in the House of Commons for the first time. This was the germ from which Parnell was able, later on, to create the formidable policy of his great party. Attitude Towards Parnell. Such a feat by isome members of our party would not have been a remarkable achievement, but. this little man, with no rhetorical resources, actually managed lo carry out this project of holding bills back. Time after time, attempts were made to confound him, but no one could. Then the Speaker complained that he could inot hear him. Biggar had been speaking from a scat below the gangway, and he calmly walked to a seat above the gangway, so that ho might meet, as he put- it, the convenience of the Speaker, and he began his rigmarole all over again. Biggar, of course, gavci enthusiasm to Parnell's new and violent policy, but his feelings toward that great leader were i always extraordinarily mixed. When the famous O'Shea Election of 1885 came on, ho was one of the men who dealt at Parnell the first deadly blow, from which in reality he never quite recovered. There was a certain grotpsquenes* in Biggar's individuality as well as in bi r policy, but deep down within him he had a positive affection for his leader. •Not long after Parnell had got into his terrible imbroglio, and his health had begun to fail, lie used to come, sometimes after weeks of absence to the House of Commons, looking deadly ill, with his face drawn, the back of his neck narrow, his complexion ghastly. One dey when Biggar had seen Parnell in this condition he turned aside and wept. (To bs continued daily.)