Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1934. BRITAIN AND IRELAND.

Greymouth Evening Star, 26 December 1934, Page 4

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 26, 1934. BRITAIN AND IRELAND.

JN this period when goodwill among men is emphasised, regret will be expressed that there is no improvement in the relations between the Governments of Britain and Ireland, but, that on the contrary, matters get worse. Between the respective peoples there is no acute ill-feeling, and it is a pity that the administrative negotiations for greater friendship have been conducted by those on each side, who do not appear to have any decided gifts for reconciliation. Mr. J. IT. Thomas and Mr. De Valera each claims to be eager for a .settlement, and they have had time enough to effect one, yet the two Governments are farther apart than ever. Unless there is soon some change in policy, the strain must prove too severe.

Speaking in Dublin, recently, Mr. De Valera objected to the use of the word “hate” in the relations between Great, Britain and Ireland —in connection with Ireland’s attitude at any rate. “I do not think that our people have any hate for the British people as such,” he went on. “What they have hated in the past was the injustice -which was being done to them and I think you will admit that everybody has the right to hate injustice. We want to live in amity with them. We would prefer, to co-operate with them in the things that both agree to be of common interest, but we are not prepared to permit them to dictate to us. The affection for the British Crown of the Unionist section in Ireland is not shared by the vast majority of the Irish people. That is the central, difficulty which could onlv be resolved in a. demo-

erotic way.” Mr. De Valera’s argument is difficult to follow. There is no attempt, to-day by Britain to “ dictate” to Ireland, which enjoys selfgovernment to the full. If the Irish people, to-day, have no affection for the Crown, they are unlike their fathers, who whatever they thought of British politics, fought and died for the King in war, and enthused over Royal visits in peace. An Irish, republic would mean a breakaway from the Empire which the Irish have done so much to win and to consolidate, and would deprive Ireland of a high status she now enjoys as a partner in the British Commonwealth. No Irish republic, —nor any other for that matter, — could be more truly democratic than the British Empire is to-day. under the King-Emperor. Mr. De Valera’s own policy is clear, and he has never tried to camouflage his resolve that Ireland should be a republic as soon as practicable. Step by step, he has moved in that direction, until,, in practice, to-day, he has not much farther to go for the attainment of his objective. The new citizenship i bill, passed in the Dail, by a fair majority, repeals, in relation to the Free State, the British Nationality Acts of .1914 and 1918, | which laid it down that British | citizenship applied to all citizens of the British Empire. It abolishes the title “British subject,” substituting the term “citizen of the Irish Free State.” On the other hand, the bill declares that, so long as the Free State is a member of the British Commonwealth, its citizens can claim the rights and privileges of British subjects in other Commonwealth countries. Those rights and privileges cannot be taken | away except by legislation in the countries concerned. Overseas Go-!

vernments should realise that they will soon be faced with a decision of importance, but friction should be. kept, at a minimum. An Irish republic could not. be recognised as part of the Empire, but the status of Irishmen outside Ireland need not be affected. They would, as now, be regarded as citizens of the country in which they reside, being good New Zealanders, Australians, Canadians or otherwise, and as fully British subjects as those of English, Scottish, or Welsh birth.