THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. TUESDAY, MAY 1, 1923. THE ROLE OF DE VALERA.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18387, 1 May 1923, Page 6

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. TUESDAY, MAY 1, 1923. THE ROLE OF DE VALERA.

Willingness to negotiate peace with the Irish Free State Governj ment has been expressed in a Re- ! publican manifesto signed by | Eamonn de Valera. Though many j outstanding men have gone from j among the insurgents, this one surj vives. Others have fallen by bullets i from pursuing troops, or have faced | a firing squad. De Yalera has been ! immune. The part he has played ; in Ireland's tragic history since the ! Treaty was signed in December, ' 1921, has been sinister. His ascend- ; ancy over the minds of many | genuine Irishmenfor he is not one : himself by birth, and only half by j blood one of the greatest para- | doxes from this land of paradox, j The signing of the Treaty with the j British authorities saw him at the I zenith in Irish affairs. He is now ! at the nadir, and perhaps hopes to j rise again. When in January of : last year, the Dail Eireann, after a I bitter debate, approved the Treaty, I De Valera immediately resigned the i presidency of that body. He was | followed in office by Arthur Griffith, j and, freed of official trammel's, made j the most of his opportunities of stirring up strife at one of the most momentous periods in the history of Ireland. From time to time it has been stated' that this man or that man was the real propelling power behind the Republican revolt; that De Valera was the figurehead ; it has even- been said that hostilities were first precipitated, by the seizure of the Four Courts, j without his consent and to force his I hand. : Against this, it must be remembered that all the most inflammatory propaganda broadcasted to stimulate resistance to the Free State Government has been published' to the world over the name De Valera: no recantation has followed its appearance. In any event, the chronology of his various proclamations disposes of this theory. Whoever may have planned ! the deeds of violence, whoever may i have executed them, it cannot be ! questioned that befpre the breach ! in the old Sinn Fein organisation led to fighting, Eamonn de Valera had openly preached civil war. The occupation of the Four Courts occurred on April 14 last year. A month "earlier De Valera, speaking of the approval of the Treaty, said: 'It was only by civil war. after , this that they could get their liberty." At this time he and his adherents bad agreed that, when the constitution was drafted and published, an election would be held. • While the verdict of the people was being awaited he was already using the words civil war, and investing them with a ring of inevitability. It is a difficult task to absolve him from blood-guiltiness. On March 19, he said: "If the treaty was accepted the fight for freedom would still go on and the Irish people, instead of fighting foreign soldiers, would have to fight the Irish soldiers of an Irish Government, set up by Irishmen." A couple of days earlier, ho had told the people that ii the treaty were accepted "They would have to wade through Irish blood. . . . through, perhaps, the blood of some of the member! of the Government, in order to get Irish freedom." So much for his words before the elections. The return of the present Dail was an extraordinary triumph for the Treaty under crippling circumstances. In i terms of the pact made between i De Valera and Michael . Collins, there went to the polls a panel of candidates representing the exact proportions of Free State and Republican partisans in the old Dail. This meant the return, unopposed, of 17 Republicans. Out of 94 members returned by vote only 17 more were opponents of the Treaty, and in some cases there had been wild intimidation in their favour. In none of the 17 cases was the voting heavily in favour of those candidates. The will of the people could not have been more strikingly manifested. Yet, because the verdict went against his own will, De Valera has been of those who, for I almost a year, have been opposing 'j that decision by violence and bloodshed. Now, when the sands of his ' destiny have all but run out, he propounds terms in which it is laid down that the judgment of the popular will must bo accepted, though not necessarily right, or just, or permanent, because acceptance makes for peace, order, and unity. It can only be deplored that he has learned this so late in the day. The equanimity with which De Valera discussed war and bloodshed, civil strife in which Irish blood was shed by Irishmen, did not diminish when words and predictions were replaced by actuality. His determination not to accept the verdict ! of the people was expressed just as : uncompromisingly. The first official White Paper issued by the Free ; State Government consisted of captured Republican correspondence, including some letters penned by ; De Valera himself. A passage stated: "We cannot point to ; authority derived from the majority of the people ; we could not, as a Government, refuse to allow the | people to decide by vote between the two Governments. If the people ! were given the decision, that would : mean the worst of all, namely, turnj ing down the republic." If, with i ■'hat realisation, he was able to urge ! a continuance of resistance, there is • little evidence of belief in the ; supreme '.viil of the people. Again, ; in February of this year, he told ! the Correspondent of a London i paper that the Irish Republicans

would never surrender in any circumstances. Nothing in his record or his utterances makes it wise to trust his present professions, or to accept him as a possible party to negotiations. The Free State Government is reported to be ignoring the overtures. This might be considered a callous disregard of a chance to end bloodshed. In view of the evidence adduced, it should rather be regarded as proving that the Government has no delusions left concerning the man over whose signature the offer appears.