Evening Post. FRIDAY, MAY 3, 1912. HOME RULE STRUGGLE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 105, 3 May 1912, Page 6

Evening Post. FRIDAY, MAY 3, 1912. HOME RULE STRUGGLE.

The lull in the Home Rule fight seems to be at an end, and we may expect the battle to be kept going now till the second reading has been disposed of. Recent messages on the subject have been neither so full nor so clear as might have been desired. We were informed on Wednesday that the second reading of the Bill had been moved by Mr. Winston Churchill — an unusual procedure, seeing that the Bill is of the most momentous character and the Prime Minister is in charge of it. Probably ivir. Asquith was ill, but the cabled report gives no explanation. Another curious point is that a long speech on Home Rule, is attributed to Mr. Harold Smith, the Unionist member for Warrington. Mr. Smith is not of such importance that he would be reported at greater length than a Cabinet Minister, nor as a Unionist would he make a speech in favour of Home Rule, nor could he make such a speech on a motion for leave to introduce a Bill to repeal the preamble to the Parliament Act, nor would a subsequent speaker declare that the Bill would bring war. First, Mr. Smith is made to object to the use of the Parliament Act in order to pass Home Rule; then, according to the report, he f proceeds to minimise the dangcite of Home Rule and to urge Ulster to keep calm. It is clear that by a singular error in transmission the debates on two different Bills and the speeches of two different speakers have been strangely blended It will probably be found that the remarks attributed to a Unionist M.P. in support of his motion for leave to introduce a Parliament Act Amendment Bill are really a part of Mr. Churchill's speech on the second reading of the Home Rule Bill. The argument is certainly quite in keeping with Mr. Churchill's style, the appeal to Ulster being the strongest part of it. "It would be a great disaster to Ireland," says the speaker, "if Ulstermen held aloof from the • National Parliament," and the Protestant north is reminded that it has a plain duty to the Protestants in the rest of Ireland to stand by the ship. "If Ulstermen refuse to bring the ship safely into port, they must not be allowed to obstruct the salvage work." This similitude is quite in Mr; Churchill's manner. Lord Selborne states that the Dominions, whose sentiment is naturally in favour of the remedy which they have found to be a sovereign specific in their own case, do not understand the complication of the problem by Ulster's antagonism. -We have certainly an inkling of the gravity 1 of this complication, and. we conoede that it is not to be settled by abstract opinions in favour of autonomy from those who have profited by it under less embarrassing conditions. How seriously the difficulty is regarded by some of the most stalwart supporters of Home Rule is shown by two recent cablegrams. Dr. Chappie, M.P., who Icnow6 at first hand the value of colonial autonomy, makes the ingenious suggestion that after the grant of "Home Rule all round " Ulster should be given the option by referendum of coming under the jurisdiction of the Scottish Parliament. But this proposal will provide no comfort for Ulster during the indefinite interval between the passing of the Home Rule Bill for Ireland and the extension of the principle to the other divisions of the United Kingdom. It also runs counter to the argument above mentioned, in favour of Ulster standing by the Protestant minority m the other parte of Ireland. We believe that there is moi^e Tiope in the proposal of Mr. William O'Brien which is reported to-day. While Sir Robert Finlay follows Sir Edward Carson and his ' supporters in prophesying civil waa* if the Bill is passed, Mr. O'Brien is satisfied that it will make for reconciliation, but he affecte no contempt for Ulster's apprehensions. " The truest safeguard, ' aays Mr. O'Brien, " wpuld be to give the Protestants a firm grip of the Irish j Parliament. Half the Senators and a fourth of the Commoners should be Protestants." This strikes us as a very generous offer. With half of one Chamber and a quarter of the other in its favour, Protestant Ulster sliould surely feel reasonably secure. There has been a good deal of talk about guarantees for the Protestants, •but we do not see much of them in the Bill. A Lower House elected in the ordinary way in single-member districts and a Senate that will ultimately be nominated entirely by the Irish Government are features which from this as well from other standpoints are decidedly unsatisfactory. Mr. O'Brion's offer is evidence of a. genuine desire for conciliation and. fair play on the part of his section of the Nationalist Party.