Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE BOUNDARY QUESTION

(Beceived March 4, 9.30 a.m.)

LONDON, 3Td March.

The Irish Debate was resumed on Lord Cecil's amendment, declaring that the Government did not intend to agree to the transfer of any great area of the six •counties, but only to minor adjustments of the boundary.

Mr. Ronald M'Neill quoted Mr. MichaelsCollins as having said that Sir James Craig had been- tricked by his own friends. Mr. Winston Churchill intervened, saying- that any 'promise {riven to Mr. Griffith and not Mr. C'oliinsthat Fermanagh and Tyrone-would be banded ' over Was absolutely untrue. He could not accept an amendment interpreting the. Treaty. t Captain Craig declared that the Government had got itself into a dreadful mess, and must break its pledges either to Ulster or to Sinn Fein. Mr. Churchill moved the closure, which was carried by 199 votes to 160 amid cries of "gag." • ■ , The amendment was negatived by 199 votes to 163. i * Lord Hugh Cecil moved that the chairman of this Boundary Commission should be appointed by the Government, with the consent of both Houses. It wag desirable to have security that the Government would make a proper appointment. ■ i ' Sir Hamar Greenwood said that the Government could not delegate its responsibility. _ ;■-.,. The amendment was negatived "without a division. - Sir James Craig's amendment, that no part of the boundary be altered without North Ireland's consent, was negatived by 207 votes to 51.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19220304.2.18.2

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 53, 4 March 1922, Page 5

Word Count
235

THE BOUNDARY QUESTION Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 53, 4 March 1922, Page 5

THE BOUNDARY QUESTION Evening Post, Volume CIII, Issue 53, 4 March 1922, Page 5