Evening Post. MONDAY, APRIL 30, 1923. WHEN FORCE FAILS

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 101, 30 April 1923, Page 6

Evening Post. MONDAY, APRIL 30, 1923. WHEN FORCE FAILS

De Valera is now willing to accept majority rule, with reservations, and make a peace favourable to himself and his followers. The manifesto in which he proclaims this is certainly a curious document, and not without ambiguity. What, for example, is the exact meaning of the first of the Btated principles: "That the sovereign rights of the nation are indefeasible and inalienable" ? Other paragraphs admit the authority of the people. Is it implied that the authority thus admitted stops short of any agreement touching the sovereign rights, and that the people, though they may govern, have no power to make treaties with any other authority? Again, while the authority of the people, is admitted, De Valera apparently desires, in his fourth principle, to rob that authority of force and effect, by stating that refusal to take, an oath shall not bar any person from sharing in the government. He states, in effeot, that the power of government lies exclusively with the people, but he will not bind himself to submit to that power. Peace may be obtained for a time on such principles, but not good government. In every State there must be at times minorities which do not see eye to eye with the majority. De Valera's principles would allow such minorities to reserve their right to defy the majority, and to obey the law only when they themselves agreed with it.

The terras, it is stated, are not likely to be accepted; but, nevertheless, this latest hope of pea.ee is brighter than any whioh has preceded it. D© Valera has not gone far enough, but he has gone bo far as to issue a manifesto whioh in essence condemns the resistance which he has been leading. There is a limited acceptance of the popular will. In the beginning, the Republican leaders did not admit that the popular will should prevail. They proclaimed themselves as keepers of the public conscience, with the right to make war upon the people who accepted the Free State Government, even though those people were an overwhelming majority. De Valera's manifesto does not assert this moral superiority of the minority, ' and that is a considerable gain. The Kepublicans now abandon their claim to diotate the conduot of the majority and to enforce their idea of freedom, though Ireland be made a desert in the process. Their present claim appears to be that they. shall have entire freedom themselves, without regard to the wishes of the majority. If there is to be good government that claim also must be abandoned.

The latest peace overture is, however! most promising because it has been forced. If De Valera had never defied the Government, there would have been no need for force; but once that defiance was mado there could be no peace without surrender. If the surrender were made by the Government, it would have meant the surrender of majority rights to a turbulent minority. The Free State Government has never .considered surrender when it has been moat severely tried, and it is unlikely to do so now. Its courage and determination, when the rebellion is finally suppressed,. will have vindicated the authority of Government in Ireland. It is this vindication of authority that Ireland stands most in need of. Thoughtful commentators have found in the -absence of popular support the source of Ireland's greatest troubles for many years past. Even»when there was peace in Ireland and good government by Englishmen the people looked upon the Government as an authority apart. They did not regard the officers of the ]w a.H their agents.. la th» days

of Sinn Fein they defied the Government. A nation which has been taught for many years to regard all Government authority as apart from itself cannot soon assimilate different ideas. Peace will come to Ireland when it is widely realised by Irishmen that they are no longer " agin the Government," but of the Government.