DAIL EIREANN'S DECISION

Otago Witness, Issue 3520, 30 August 1921, Page 17

DAIL EIREANN'S DECISION

Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright,

LONDON, August 26. Official: The Dai! Eireann unanimously rejected the proposed terms. Mr De Valera, in reply to Mr Lloyd George, said : “ 1 laid your proposals before Dail Eireann, which by a unanimous vote rejected them. From your letter of August 13 it was clear that the principle which we were asked to accept was that the geographical propinquity of Ireland to Great Britain imposed a condition of subordination of Ireland’s rights to Great Britain’s strategic interests as she conceives them, and that ihe very length and persistence of the efforts made in the past to compel Ireland to acquiesce in foreign dominion imposed the acceptance of that domination. “ Now, we cannot believe that your Government intends to commit itself to the principle of sheer militarism, destructive of international moralitv and fatal to

TERMS UNANIMOUSLY REFUSED

the world’s peace. If a small nation’s right to independence is forfeit when a more powerful neighbour covets its territory for the military or other advantages which it is supposed to confer, there is an end to liberty, and r.o longer can any small nation claim the right to a separate sovereign existence. Holland and Denmark can be made subservient to Germany; Belgium to Cq&many or France; Portugal to Spain. If nations that have been forcibly annexed to the Empire have Inst thereby their title to independence there can bo no rebirth of freedom for them. “In Ireland’s case, to speak of her seceding from a partnership which she lias not accepted, or from an allegiance which she has not undertaken, is fundamentally false—just as the claim to subordinate our independence to British strategy is fundamentally unjust, too. Neither can we betray our nation’s trust.

“ If our refusal be made an issue for war, we deplore it. We are as conscious of our responsibility to the living as of our obligations to our heroic dead. We have not forgotten war, nor do we seek it - but if war is made upon us we must defend ourselves. We are confident that, whether our defence is successful or unsuccessful, nobody representative of Irish men or women will ever propose to surrender the nation’s birthright. We shall hang on to the end of the conflict. If your Government be determined to impose its will by force, and, antecedent to negotiation, to insist upon conditions involving the surrender of our whole national position and to make negotiations a mockery, the responsibility for continuance of the conflict rests upon you. On the basis of the broad guiding principle of government bv consent of the governed, peace can be secured —peace that will be just and honourable to all and fruitful of concord and enduring amitv. To negotiate such a peace, Dail Eireann is ready to appoint representatives, and, if your Government accepts this principle, it is proposed to invest them with plenary powers to meet and arrange with you for its application in detail.” DOOR STILL OPEN TO NEGOTIATE. LONDON. August 26. Mir Lloyd George’s reply to Mr De Valera intimates that the Government’s offer to continue the conference is still open, but the Prime Minister emphasises that the British offer is such as the great Irish patriots in the past never dreamed of. The opinion of the civilised world upon the offer shows this. Mr Lloyd George says that he cannot prolong a mere exchange of Notes. It is essential that definite and immediate progress shall be made towards a basis of settlement. “ Your letter,” he continues, “seems to show no such progress. If the considerations we have put forward can be reconciled with Irish aspirations, I will be happy to meet you and your colleagues.” GOVERN M ENT I>R OFOUNDLY DISAPPOINTED. LONDON, August 27. Replying to Mr De Valera, Mr Lloyd George says : The British Government is profoundly disappointed at your letter. You write of the conditions of the meeting as though no meeting had ever taken place. The proposals already made were not made in a haggling spirit. My colleagues and myself went to the very limit of our powers in an endeavour to reconcile British and Irish interests. The proposals have gone far beyond all precedent and have been approved as liberal by the whole of the civilised world. Even in quarters which show sympathy with the most extreme Irish claims they are regarded as the utmost the Empire can reasonably offer or that Ireland can reasonably expect. Your letter shows no recognition of this fact. Further negotiations must, I fear, be futile unless some definite * progress is made towards the acceptance of a basis. You declare that our proposals involve the surrender of Ireland’s whole national position. What are the facts? Under the settlement we outlined Ireland will control every nerve-fibre of her national existence. She will speak her own language, make her own religious life, an t havo complete power in taxation and finance, subject only to an agreement for keeping trade and transport as free as possible between herself and Gr'eat Britain, which is her best market. She will have uncontrolled authority in regard to educational and all the moral and spiritual interests of her race. She will also have authority over law and order in the land, agriculture, conditions of labour, industry, health, the homes of the people, and her own land defence. Ireland within her own shores will lie free in every aspect of national activity, national expression, and national development. The States in the American Union, sovereign though they be, enjoy no such range of rights. We consider these proposals completely fulfil your wish that the principle of government hy consent of the governed should be the broa d guiding principle of the settlement which your plenipotentiaries are to negotiate. That principle, first developed by England, is the mainspring of the representative institutions which she was the first to create. It is now the very life of the British Commonwealth. We could not have invited the Irish people to take their place in that commonwealth on any other principle. We are convinced that through it we can heal old misunderstandings and achieve an enduring partnership as honourable to Ireland as to the other nations whereof the commonwealth consists. When you argue that the relations of Ireland with the British Empire are comparable in principle with those of Holland and Belgium with the German Empire, I find it necessary to repeat once more that these are premises which no British Government, whatever its complexion, can ever accept. In demanding that Ireland should be treated as a separate sovereign Power with no allegiance to the Crown, no loyalty to the sister nations of the commonwealth, you are advancing claims which the most famous national leaders in Irish history from Grattan to Parnell and Redmond explicitly disowned. Grattan in a famous phrase declared that the ocean protests against separation and the sea against union. O’Connell spoke similarly in the House of Commons in 1830. The British (iovcrrinient offers Ireland all that these patriots asked and more. Tt- is playing with phrases to suggest that the principle of government by consent of the governed compels a recognition of that demand or that, in repudiating it, we ire straining geographical and historical considerations in order to justify a claim to ascendancy over the Irish people. There is no

political principle, however clear, that can be applied without regard to the limitations imposed hv physical and historical facts. To deny these limitations "Quid involve a dissolution of all democratic States. We do not believe that the permanent reconciliation of Great Britain and Ireland can ever ho attained without a recognition of their physical and historical inter-dependence, which makes a complete political and economical separation impracticable for both. Mr Lloyd George quotes a passage in Lincoln’s first inaugural address on the brink of the American Civil War as expressing the British standpoint: “Physically speaking, we cannot separate. Suppose you go to war, when you cease fighting. the identical old question as to the terms of intercourse are again upon you.” Mr Lloyd G eorge continues : I thought 1 made ; t clear both in the conversations and the subsequent communications that we can discuss no settlement which involves a refusal on the part of Ireland to a free, equal, and loyal partnership in the British Commonwealth under one Sovereign. We are reluctant to precipitate the issue, but I must point out that a prolongation of the present state of affairs is dangerous. Action is being taken in various directions which, if continued, would prejudice the truce and ultimately lead to its termination. This would, indeed, be deplorable. V hilst, therefore, prepared to make every allowance as to time which will advance the cause of peace, we cannot prolong a mere exchange of Notes. It is essential that some definite immediate progress be made towards the basis upon which further negotiations can usefully proceed. The Prime Minister concludes: In Hus and my previous letters T set forth the considerations which must govern the attitude of the Government. It’ von are prepared to examine how far these considerations can be reconciled with the aspirations vou represent T shall be happy to meet you and your colleagues. AMERICAN PRESS COMMENT. NEW YORK, August 27. The New York Times editorially remarks: “ And the fanatic leader who would now needlessly plunge Ireland into a murderous warfare again would find it hard to maintain himself. It is this conviction, doubtless, which lies behind Mr De Valera’s eagerness that the rejection of the British proposals should not be taken as final, and that the discussions should be continued. So long as they are there is hope of a settlement.” The New York Evening Post savs: “ M r Llovd George can justify his action with the argument that he offered the Irish even more than recognition of the principle of government by consent of the governed. Even if the somewhat truculent beginning of Mr De Valera’s reply were not eaten up by its mild conclusion", it would be destroyed by its own lack of convincing logic. The British conditions cannot hamper the real destinies of the Irish." The New York Tribune says: “The Irish reply is evasive and laboured, and does not breathe sufficient conviction that the resumption of warfare would he a crime against civilisation and an affront to the hopes and judgment of the rest of the world. The British terms are liberal. Can Mr De Valera expect more?” PRIVATE SESSION OF DAIL EIREANN. DUBLIN, August 27. The Dail Eireann will consider Mr Lloyd George’s reply at a private session tomorrow. MR DE VALERA RE-ELECTEI) PRESIDENT. LONDON, August 26. At a meeting of Dail Eireann Mr I)e Valera was re-elected President of the Irish Republic. Mr De Valera, in thanking members, said he felt like a bov amongst boys, and he hoped they would win their cause, which was as near heaven as boys are. Mr De Valera then read his reply to the British proposals, declaring: “It is the bedrock of the nation’s existence, and upon, that rock we mean to stand.” Mr Michael Collins's proposition to raise a loan of £20,000,000 in America and £500,000 in Ireland was carried. All the members of Mr De Valera's Cabinet were re-elected. Countess Markieviecz was appointed to the portfolio of Labour. “CANNOT COUNTENANCE SEPARATION." LONDON, August 27. A secret session of the Dail Eireann considered Mr Lloyd George’s reply, the Dail Eireann’s reply to which is expected on Monday. Mr Lloyd George was presented with the freedom of the City of Barnsley. Referring to the terms offered to Ireland, he said that the terms commended themselves not merely to Great Britain, but to the whole civilised world. “V» e cannot countenance separation, which would lead to the most cruel and the most tenable civil war Ireland had ever seen. It is Southern Ireland that is not satisfied with freedom, and insists upon separation. 1 trust that common-sense will prevail. We only want to do what is fair, and what is just and right. 1 believe that in spite of all indications to the contrary, when the Irish people realise that real free doin is offered to them, and that all they arc asked to do is to join the proudest community of nations in the world ae free men, they will realise that their destiny will he greatest as a free people inside a free federation of free peoples.” RECOUD OF KIDNA PPING. LONDON, August 22. Sir Ha mar Greenwood, in a written answer to a Parliamentary question,

states that the Trish Republican Army had kidnapped seven officers, one private, 19 police, and 32 civilians up to duly 1. OUTRAGE IN BELFAST. LONDON, August 22. An unknown man threw a bomb in Ivrone street. Belfast, on .Sunday evening, injuring six persons, including a girl named tlanigan, aged 20. who is not expected to recover. 1 he street was crowded with children, who were playing, when the bomb was thrown. There was a terrifio explosion, followed by agonising cries from the injured children who were struck by fragments of metal. The explosion shattered windows in the street. The bomb thrower escaped. UNLAWFUL USE OF FIREARMS. LONDON, August 23. Two middle-aged men, named O’Brien, and Phillips, were sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment at Glasgow for conspiring to further the interests of the Sinn Fein by the unlawful use of firearms. Two other Sinn Feiners were sentenced to three years for being in possession of revolvers and ammunition near Clydebank. GENERAL SMUTS’S SCHEME ADVOCATED. MELBOt RNE, August 25. Iho Senate, on a motion for adjournment by Senator Lynch, discussed the situation in Ireland. Senator Lynch advocated the acceptance of General Smuts’s scheme as a basis for settlement. Other speakers, including the Minister of Repatriation, supported Senator Lynch’s views. AH expressed the hope that the negotiations now in progress would not prove a failure. From the New Zealand ’tablet, we learn that,, the office-bearers of the Otago Provincial t ouncil of the Self-Determination for Ireland League of New Zealand are: Patron, the Right Rev. Bishop Whyte; president, Dr Milligan ; vice-presidents, Messrs if. M'Stay and C. A Shiel; hon. treasurer, the Very Rev. Father Coffey; minute secretary, Mr J. J. Wilson; committee- Mrs M. A. Jackson, Miss A. Brennan. the Rev. I). Silk, Messrs J. B. Lallan, J. Robinson, 11. Murrotv. I). Whelan, A. G■ Neill. P. J Hussey, and J. J. Marlow. Editorially the Tablet asserts, with reference to the British Government’s proposals for an Hash settlement: “After seven hundred years Ireland is not going to yield now to a little Welsh upstart who has mined England and will go down to history as a liar and an unprincipled adventurer.”