THE IRISH IN COMMAND

Otago Witness, Issue 2928, 27 April 1910, Page 13

THE IRISH IN COMMAND

i WHAT DO THEY WANT? THE ASQUITH-REDMOND COMPACT. I SUGGESTED UNIONIST ADVANCE. (From Oub Own Correspondent.) LONDON, February 4. The polling bad not been a week in ' progress before it was fairly plain that whichever side was successful the majority would be so small that the Irish Nationalists must of necessity dominate the new Parliament. The very possibility of such a position was in itself sufficiently repugnant to a great many people, both Liberal and Conservative, and there can be little doubt that it has had a not inconsiderable effect upon the subsequent voting. That the compact between Mr Redmond and Mr Asquith was not altogether popular in Ireland is evident from the successes of the O'Brienites, which have weakened the Nationalist party already to the extent of eight seats, or 16 votes on a division. Mr O'Brien is furious against " the .gang of politicians who have betrayed Ireland to the English Treasury, degraded the Irish party into the mere slaves and hirelings of Molly j Maguire, and made Home Rule the by- ! word and the laughing-stock of all English parties." UNIONIST ADVANCES. "Angling for the Irish vote" is the phrase which most aptly expresses the position of both the great parties today. Within a few days of the opening of the polls the Daily Telegraph, the leading Unionist organ, put out the first feeler. Almost simultaneously Mr Asquith made, in the North, his second important reference to the .subject of Home Rule. In all fairness it must be said that that declaration did not differ from the original statement at the Albert Hall as to the limitations which would be applied to the Irish autonomy. Yet the weight of the Irish vote had by now become so much magnified, in view of the closeness of the result as between the Unionist and Liberal parties, that the whole weight of the Unionist artillery was directed to convincing the Nationalists of the folly of their compact. " Sold," " betrayed," " bartered," were typical of the headings which appeared in the Unionist press. Mr O'Brien was quite safe in saying at the beginning of the present week that it was " bosh" for the Irish to sup Dose that they would get Home Rule in the present Parliament. Home Rule, even as Mr Asquith defines it—that is to say, with the control of the army, the navy, the Foreign Office, and the Customs still vested in the Parliament at Westminster—could only be carried over the dead body of the'House of Lords, and the House of Lords can hardly be amended and liberalised to the necessary degree by the exercise of such a majority as the Liberals appear likely to possess. THE PRIME MINSTER'S DEFINITION. "I have laid down two principles," says Mr Asquith, "which cover the whole ground. You must set up a body i which will have full powers of selfgovernment in purely Irish affairs, and whatever body you set up there must be maintained in the Imperial Parliament and Imperial Government here absolutelv unquestioned authority over everything.'" The Unionist reply to that, as voiced by one Unionist paper, was that if Ireland would be satisfied with such a measure she could get it from the Unionist party, and not the Liberals, and that she would then pet besides what was most essential for her prosperity—viz., Tariff Reform. Mr Balfour himself was not inclined to accent that view. " I am convinced," he asserted in Haddingtonshire, " that whatever mav be said at the first blush for a Home Rule system, it is one which is not only inimical, as I • believe, to the best interests of Ireland, but is absolutely fatal to the interests of Great Britain and of the Empire." Still, in face of this declaration, the small hand of Independent Nationalists arc daily classed as Unionists. So for the rr they are. In effect, they desire a r reater measure of autonomy than IV -;quith holds out any hope of, but, a Mr O'Brien says : "If they were to wait till the House of Lords was abolished they would have to wait until they were older , than Methuselah." THE CLEAVAGE. And so they will vote against the party of John Redmond, who has come forward personally with the assurance that Mr Asquith has reiterated rather than retracted his Albert Hall pledge. He stated frankly that he and his party did not ask for what was known in England as separation, and that statement makes quite plain for the first time the real

nature of the understanding upon which Mr T. P. O'Connor's organisation was put into operation to use the Irish vote in Great Britain to support the Liberal and Labour candidates. TheTe has evidently been some grave misunderstanding between the Nationalist leaders and the Nationalist constituencies in Ireland, and the suggestion is now thrown out overtly that the organisation is acting in obedience to the dictates of the American Irish, from whom it derives so much money. The suggestion is that when Mr T. P. O'Connor was in America a month or so ago collecting funds for the present campaign he was told pretty plainly that the donors did not like the prospects of a Tariff Reform success, and would expect the Nationalist party to throw its weight in against the ! Protectionists. Mr O'Connor indignantly ! repudiates the charge as ridicuously contrary to the real facts. " The people of j our race who subscribe in America," j he says, "attach no conditions, suggest' no conditions, to their gifts, which are the outcome of their ardent love for the Motherland of the Irish race, and an ardent desire to improve her condition. They take up the position, every one of them, that it is not for them, but for the men on the spot," to choose the policy. And ninety-nine out of every hundred Irish Americans have implicit confidence in the judgment as well as in the partiot- I ism of -the Irish party, and in the leadership of Mr Redmond." WHAT DOES IRELAND WANT? The Daily Mail asks this question in one of those letters to the editor which are significently " starred" on the leader page. The answer is " Tariff Reform," ! and the moral is that if the Unionists will continue "to oppose themselves obstin- j ately to every hint of Home Kule," the ■ Irish party will never allow the Unionists to hold office. The writer gives his assurance, moreover, that the Irish who j desire Home Rule do not %vish for separa- i tion from England. In short, they know on which side their bread is buttered. j This was corroborated next day by another statement, apparently from an authoritative Irish source, and defining ; in the same way a measure of Home Rule which the Unionists could grant, and which, strangely enough, is subject to just the same limitations as Mr Asquith proposes. He, too, believes that what Ireland wants most is Tariff Reform, and here is his pregnant conclusion : Liberals cannot grant Tariff Reform. They cannot pass any measure of Home Rule. And their chance of abolishing the Lords' " veto" may be adjourned to the Greek Kalends. But the Tory party is pledged to a tariff, and is alone capable of persuading the Lords to consent to Home Rule. If that proposal does not mean separa- i tion from the Crown, or the break-up of the Imperial Parliament, or Irish ! control of military and naval resources, I why should the Upper House reject it? j Because of Ulster ? But half of Ulster is already converted to it; and the ! other half, in a self-governed Ireland, ! would soon find its place and its power. I Why should the Conservative party, j by clinging to Orange prejudices now oat of date, compel even Catholics to ' fall into line with a movement which '' aims at the destruction of all churches, , of the Empire, and perhaps of the ! Monarchy? j Let the men who stand for Disraeli's principles scatter to the winds all fears ■ of separation by coming to terms with i Home Rule. Now is the golden oppor- j tunity. They alone can unite the Empire. i That is a feeling which is undoubtedly i strong in the minds of the Unionist party to-day. It is a party pledged freshly and irrevocably to Tariff Reform and to de- ! fence of the Second Chamber, but its j objections to a measure of local autonomy for Ireland have weakened considerably. IRISH IN GREAT BRITAIN. Effect on Majorities. The Scotsman has made- the following calculation to illustrate the effect of the ' Irish vote in Scotland on the Radical j majorities : t I

In the Scotland Division of Liverpool (Mr T. P. O'Connor) 3000 out of 5326 voters are said to be Irish Catholics; in the Exchange Division there are 1000 Irish voters, Abercrombie 600, Kirkdale 1.000, West Toxteth 750, Walton 500, Everton 750, West Derby 500, East Toxteth 600." At Newcastle-on-Tyne there are said to be 5000 Irish voters. WHAT IS TO FOLLOW? The New Parliament. The first business before the new Parliament will necessarily be the passing of the .Budget, without which the finances of the current year, expiring so early, cannot be met. It is admitted by the Unionist papers that the principles of the Budget are approved by the country as a whole, and that means that as it comes forward again—probably somewhat modified—it will be passed by the Commons. "In that case,"" says one ultra-Conservative writer, "it is difficult to see how* the Lords can refuse to pass it." Failing other complications, that is the accepted .belief ag t# what will occur.

The Standard, one of the staunchest Tariff IReform papers, admits frankly that for the present at least Tariff Reform is worsted : " We are quite willing to acknowledge that its opportunity has not yet come. For legislative purposes Tariff Reform is temporarily in abeyance. So much Mr Asquith and his friends have achieved." But the Standard raises the question whether the Irish will again feel justified in voting for certain clauses of the Budget which penalise Ireland. It certainly does remain to be seen whether the compact will ensure loyalty to those clauses, though the conditions on which it was entered into pre-suppose that it will. Otherwise, what is the alternative ? Mr Asquith has stated clearly and succiently that the Government intends to use its majority forthwith to cripple the veto of the Lords, an absolutely necessary precedent to any attempt to grant Home Rule. The Irish recognised this necessity long ago. It was purely on that account that they bargained to vote with the Government, so we may fairly assume that so long as Mr Asquith maintains this order of things—(l) Budget, (2) Lords' veto, (3) Home Rule—they will be loyal to him. Whether he will succeed with No. 2 is really the question before the country. Nobody believes that he will do so without an appeal to the King, and few believe that the success of such an appeal or of any method of reforming the Lords would at once render the Liberal Government immune from the hostility of the Lords. The only really hopeful sign for the Government is the overtures that some of the Unionist organs have made with a view to an " understanding" between the Unionists and the Liberals, to free the country of the " domination of the Nationalists." Such a coalition cannot be entered into by Mr Asquith without breaking faith with the Irish, who so far are faithful to their pledges. And if this objection did not exist there are still elements within the ranks of the Government which "would reject such an understanding as a surrender. On the whole the greatest probability of the future is the success of the Government in No. 1 and possibly No. 2, its defeat at No. 3, and another general election in a few months.

Irish Majority. vote. Edinburgh E R. 2487 . .. 700 Edinburgh Central R. 1985 . 800 Edinburgh South ... R. 2334 . .. 800 Leith Burghs R. 2606 . . 2000 Glasgow (Blackfriars) R. 1700 .. 1100 Glasgow (Bridge-ton) R 1797 . . 1000 Glasgow (St. Rollox) R. 3198 . 1400 Glasgow (College) ... R. 712 .. 1300 Glasgow (Camlachie) U. 434 . 700 Glasgow (Central) ... u. 655 . 900 Glasgow (Tradeston) R, 193 .. . 800 Renfrewshire W. ... R. 849 .. 600 Greenock R, 1601 .. . 900 Ayr Burghs U. 53 . . 370 Hawick Burghs R. 993 . 225 Peebles and Selkirk R. 206 . 65 Perthshire W. U. 298 .. . 225 Ayrshire North R, 238 . . 250 RoxburghshireR. 317 . .. 200 Stirlingshire R. 3705 .. ,. 1800