IRISH CRISIS

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 29 September 1924, Page 5

IRISH CRISIS

THE BOUNDARY QUESTION. BY GABLE press association—copyright . LONDON, Sept, 27. The political excitement m Belfast has been accentuated by two bellicose speeches in the provinces. Mr Badington, K.U., speaking at Derry, said tney natl entered the boundary fight not as a. party, bat as a nation under the Government's orders, and everything done in the right woum be under disciplined order. Everyone would have a place assigned to mm. tiie Government would issue orders and they would carry them out to trie bitterest end.

Mr Gordon, a Parliamentary Undersecretary. m the Ulster Ministry, speaking at Newton Hamilton, said that when visiting Liverpool he had organised three battalions' of Urangemen, who were ready to assist Ulster in trie forthcoming fight. A Unionist demonstration in Ulster in connection with the boundary question. adopted a resolution expressing determination to- resist by. every possible means any attempt to drive loyal citizens from under the Union Jack without their consent.

Lord Londonderry, in a speech, said Ulster had made an advance in the hope of leaching an agreement by consenting to negotiate with the Free State, but that was as far as Ulster could go. A telegram was read from Lord Carson, signed “Edward Carson, covenanter,” declaring that their old leader was with them heart and soul.

Sir James Craig (Premier of Ulster) sent a letter to a Belfast demonstration stating that Ulster was upholding principles equally important throughout the colonies, because they firmly maintained that the rights and privileges accorded to a subordinate Parliament could not be abrogated except by the Parliament to which they were assigned.

An important statement was read by Mr James McNeill (High Commissioner for the Irish Free State in London) at a luncheon to English and Irish journalists. He said Irishmen did net recognise the right to..make the choice for the British Government as an absolute right of any Irish minority, but the great majority of Irishmen recognised it- as the most peaceful 1 and sureest'means of obtaining Irish unity and ending Anglo - Irish "hostility. Free Staters did not doubt that unity would come by agreement in due course, though it might be delayed. As regards the contention that a pledge was given to Ulster which induced her to accent the 1920 Act, Mr McNeill argued that Ulster, in this condition, merely meant the Ulster Unionist Association, and such a party pledge could not be regarded as ground for casting aside the treaty. He regretted that at least one member of the House of Commons was already discussing forcible resistance of any transfer of population of which Ulster disapproved, even if the Government of Great Britain approved. Free Staters were not appealing to force, hut to reason and justice, and were asking that the settlement of the boundary he entrusted to an Imperial arbitrator, to whom they offered no advice. The Ulster Association has addressed a manifesto to the' members of the Imperial House of Commons, in which it says: “Ulster does not come as a suppliant seeking saviour, hut as a loyal laughter of; the Imperial household asking for justice.” The manifesto recalls the rebellion of 1916. and declares that “while Ulster noured out blood and treasure alongside the rest of the Empire to ensure the triumph of right aud iustice, the South '■’ r 'cd the opportunity to shoot British soldiers in Dublin and to enter into liaison with Germany for the overthrow of the British Empire.”