JRv. 40] INTERVIEW AVITII MK. CIIA.MJJEIILA1N l.'H
Parnell and I worked together in abolishing flogging in the army.'
* Did yon think him a remarkable man 4? '
Mr. Clicunl)Mi(tl)i. 'Very remarkable. A great man. Unscrupulous, if I may say so. I do not wish to be misunderstood in my meaning of the word "unscrupulous." I moan that ho was unscrupulous like every great man, I have < ftc.n thought Parnell was like Napoleon, lie allowed nothing to stand in his way. He stopped at nothing to gain his end. If a man opposed him, he flung him aside and dashed on. lie did not care. Ho did not harbour any enmity. Ho was too groat a man for that. lie was indifferent about the means he used to gain his object. That is my view/
* You say ho was unscrupulous. Did you fun! that he was a man who kept his word ? '
Mr. Chttmlwrhtin. i Certainly. He was a pleasant man to (leal with in that rosptvt. .He, was a guotl man to make a bargain with, and he had a keen eye for a bargain. He was a great Parliamentarian, lie understood polities. He knew that you cannot always get your own way, and that you must Homulimes take the best thing you can get at a given moment. There wan nothing irrocomnlablo about him. His main purpose he no doubt always had at the back of bin mind, but it did not prevent him from dealing with every important issue that arose*. He could approach any question— apart from the subject of an Irish Parliament, which I suppose was his main purpose and deal with that question for the time being an if no other question existed. My relations with Parnell wore buHinoss relations, and I found thorn very pleanant. Ho sometimes dined with me, I should not say that he was socially
K 2 whenever ho saw the question was in danger, or whenever any of our people flagged, In that sense, if you like,nd as Parnell had risen to in n shorter timo than I now take to tell the Htory. Whenoin Mr, (*lml**tunr,* Nr\t <luy tht*