HOME RULE FOR IRELAND

Otago Witness, Issue 3032, 24 April 1912, Page 27

HOME RULE FOR IRELAND

DISCUSSION ON THE BILL. CRITICISM BY MR BALFOURLONDON,' April 15. In the House of Commons Mr Balfour said the architects of the great oversea federal systems would never have been responsible for this botched and unworkmanlike scheme of the Government. The 10 per cent, margin allowed to the Irish Executive would lead to Customs barriers between Ireland and Great Britain, and the guarantees for Ulster were intended for British consumption. They deceived no one in Ireland. In replying to a question in the House of Commons Mr Asquith stated that after a triennium the Irish Legislature might alter the qualification of electors and the distribution of seats without altering the number of members. Mr Balfour, speaking in a crowded House sarcastically paid a tribute to the dexterity of the Government in not consulting the electors.- He ridiculed the talk that the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament was safeguarded, and said he objected to Ireland being regarded as a mere hanger-on to a rich country as a poor relation. They should view the United Kingdom as a whole, and not search too closely to see whether any part contributed more than it took from the Exchequer. He asked whether the Constabulary, for which Britain would pay for a sexennium, would be under British or Irish control? If the former, how could the Irish Executive be responsible for law and order? The Prime Minister's initial federal experiment was lopsided, and utterly unworthy of British statesmanship. He did not believe that the English and Scottish members would support an insane federal system which was divided by Customs barriers. IfIreland could use the Customs against foreigners, the Government would be involved in appalling difficulties arising from the reversal of her true policy of national development. Great social communities felt that they must maintain their position by integration, not by disintegration. Mr Balfour added that South Africa had realised lier place in the Empire by rejecting a Home Rule Federation and adopting closer union. Mr Asquith's lopsided federalism was only a fair-weather Constitution. If the Nationalists really believed that Ireland should be a nation they ought not to be content with such a makeshift. He desired to see the Irish as free as the people of England and Scotland and to co-operate in Empire work. He declared that they had such freedom under the present system. Mr Samuel pointed out that in 1906 Mr Balfour had described the granting of self-government to South Africa as a reckless scheme. He denied that the granting of Home Rule had led to separatist tendencies. Autonomy was essential to Imperial unity. After accustoming Ireland to expenditure on the English scale it would be indefensible to ask her to find the whole of her expenditure. The new Parliament, if not assisted, would be faced the first year with a deficit exceeding one-fifth of the whole revenue. At the same time it would be unjust permanently to saddle the British taxpayer. He was convinced that when Ireland was prosperous she would share the burden of Empire. If the Irish Government was able to economise it could remit any taxes it liked. It would be impossible to give unfettered control of the Customs, as such a course would be inconsistent with the Government's general policy. Mr Samuel also stated that the finan-

cial experts who inquired into AngloIrish finance had found it so utterly unsound that they recommended complete fiscal autonomy and an annual subvention of £900,000. The Government was unable to accept the suggestion, and therefore the whole of the Irish revenue wouifl continue to be paid into tne Imperial Exchequer while the deficit lasted. The total amount transferred annually from the Exchequer would be about £6,000,000. This would not be a grant, but would be derived from Irish taxes. The cost of the reserved services would be about £5,000,000, and the money loss thereon at the outset would be £2,000,000. This deficit would disappear in a decade if the present prosperity was maintained. The 10 per cent, variation in the Customs duties was based on France's and Germany's local government systems. Any increase over the 10 per cent, would go to the English Exchequer. The Irish Executive, controlling the excise, controlled as a consequence the Customs duties on beer and spirits, also the power to increase the income and ' death duties and to borrow for national development. Lord Hugh Cecil declared that if Ireland were treated as a separate nationality she could not receive financial aid without dishonour, and she would be reduced from the status of wife to that of mistress. He believed that the Protestants would take a share of the public life. The trouble was due to the Ulster Protestants' pretensions to the ascendency. BILL READ A FIRST TIME. LONDON, April 16. Mr Simcox, the Lord Mayor of Cqrk_ J-ns tesigned, owing Use h-jstilc criti-

cism of his acceptance of an invitation to the National Convention, contrary to the All-for-Ireland League's resolution. The corporation of Belfast received Mr Devlin's invitation to send delegates to the convention, but the Lord Mayor declined to entertain a motion on the subject. The Liberal Unionist Association of Ulster has issued a manifesto which says that the bill confirms Ulster's stern resolve against being relegated, under any .circumstances, to the control of an Irish Parliament, which, the manifesto declares, has unrestricted powers under the bill. April 17. Mr W. H. Long defied the English supporters of the bill to say that Home Rule would confer better government on Ireland. The bill would strike seriously at Ireland's future prosperity. The Government had done nothing to placate Ulster ; on the contrary it had done everything to increase the bitterness and suspicion. Mr T. O'Connor defended the Catholics against the accusation of intolerance, which lie described as an empty, mean, and lying calumny. He declared that the Senate would be a powerful Protestant safeguard, and suggested that half the Senators should be nominated by the Protestant bodies with the power to veto every appointment where the salary was over £SOO. Mr Bonar Law said it was impossible to regard the bill as final, because it conferred a Constitution to which none of the self-governing colonies would submit for a week. The power of veto was not exercised in the colonies. One democratic government could not control another. The guarantees were worthless. He would give Ireland, if possible, the same powers as Canada, because then there would be a chance of a friendly Ireland. Under the bill, whenever things went wrong all the blame would be placed on the Imperial restrictions, and the agitation would thus remain in the Irish Parliament, making it more dangerous than now. Ulster's opposition made Home Rule impossible. He reiterated his statement that the Government was acting against its convictions because of the dependent Irish votes. The Prime Minister's debt of honour regarding the reform of the House of Lords must wait till the debts of shame had been paid to Mr Redmond. The bill could not be carried without submission to the people. Mr Birrell said Mr Bonar Law's speech was violent and impudent. The Liberals were content with their Prime Minister, and did not envy the Opposition its new leader. In the House of Commons the Home Rule Bill was read a first time by 360 votes to 266. The majority comprised 245 Liberals, 70 Labourites, and eight O'Brienites. Sir C. J. Cory voted against the bill, and the Hon. Agar Roberts did not vote.

OPPOSITION BY THE IRISH CHURCH. LONDON, April 17. Mr Redmond has received a congratulatory message from New Zealand. It states that if necessary New Zealand will subscribe a. further £IO,OOO for Home Rule. At a special Synod meeting the Irish Church protested against any Home Rule, arresting the beneficent Imperial legislation which was producing prosperity in Ireland, and appealing to co-religionists to assist in defeating the Home Rule Bill. FINANCIAL PROPOSALS CRITICISED. LONDON, April 17. The Times says that a system of embryo federal finance will be applied to Ireland. Meanwhile she does not contribute a penny for Imperial purposes until some unspecified date, while receiving an annual grant of two millions, which is only defensible while she is part of the United' Kingdom.

The text of the bill has been issued. Senators are appointed for a term of eight years, and members of the commons elected for five. The Irish Parliament will be summoned in September, 1913, whereupon the Irish members at Westminster will resign. PROVISIONS OP THE BILL. LONDON, April 18. The Home Rule Bill contains 48 clauses, but no preamble. It provides that one-fourth of the senators ehall retire every second yeaT. The Senate is debarred from amending or rejecting money bills. Ministers are empowered to speak in either House, but to vote in only that to which they belong. Tlie bill provides for Irish representation in the Imperial Parliament when the time is opportune for a revision of tlio financial provisions, making representation in the House of Commons equivalent to that of Britain on a, population basis. The second rending will probably be taken prior to the Whitsuntide recess. Sir J. B. Lonsdale ha 6 given notice of motion in favour of the rejection of the bill. A manifesto signed by Mr O'Brien and the Healys states that they will not hesitate to summon a conference of the All for Ireland League to discuss the bill in the event of an emergency requiring

action. Meanwhile (they view the impossibility of passing any Home Rule Ball. They deprecate sectional demonstrations for or against the bill. The bill removes all religious disability attending the appointment of the Lordlieutenant, and fixes the salary at £SOOO. MR REDMOND'S APPROVAL. LONDON, April 19. Mr Redmond declares that the Home RuLe Bill is a good workable measure, and should enable the Irish to show the world the advantages of self-government.