IRISH DISPUTE

Southland Times, Issue 22192, 7 December 1933, Page 7

IRISH DISPUTE

NOTES RELEASED FREE STATE’S ATTITUDE ■ INDEPENDENCE WANTED CONFLICTING OPINIONS (British Official Wireless). Rugby, December 5. Mr J. H. Thomas read to the House of Commons to-day the despatch received from Mr de Valera and the reply which had been sent to him. In his despatch Mr de Valera referred to the statement made by Mr Thomas in the House of Commons on November 14, calling attention to the fact that the bills then before the Free State Parliament conflicted with the Anglo-Irish Treaty and expressing the desire of the British Government to see the Irish Free State taking its full share as a member of the commonwealth of her own free will and accepting its responsibilities and enjoying its privileges. Mr de Valera said the Irish people had never sought membership of the commonwealth and their association with Great Britain and the commonwealth had never on their side been voluntary. In every generation they tried to maintain the right to exist as a distinct and independent nation, and whenever they took British rule they did so only under the pressure of an overwhelming material force. The treaty of 1921 involved no fundamental change in their attitude and they did not accept it is a final settlement of their relations with Britain or as giving Britain the right to interfere with their constitutional development. “Evils of Forced Association.’’ The Free State Government inferred from Mr Thomas's statement of November 14 that the British Government now realized the evils of forced association and would not treat as a cause of war or other aggressive action a decision of the Irish people to sever connection with the commonwealth. Mr de Valera asked that this attitude be formulated in a direct statement. The reply sent by Mr Thomas to Mr de Valera, after saying the British Government could not accept his description of the relations between the two countries, recalled its view of the 1921 treaty set forth in his despatch of April 9 of last year in the following words: “His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom entered into the 1921 settlement with a single desire that it should end a long period of bitterness between the two countries, and it was its belief that the settlement brought measures of peace and, contentment which could not have been reached by any other means. Further, as a direct result of that settlement the Irish Free State has participated in and contributed to notable constitutional developments during the last few years whereby the position of the dominions as equal members with the United Kingdom of the British Commonwealth of Nations under the Crown .has been defined and made clear to the world.” Treaty Settlement Accepted. The reply goes on to point out that the treaty settlement was duly accepted by the elected representatives of the people of the Irish Free State, and its acceptance had been subsequently confirmed at the Free State general election. The period which elapsed between 1921 and 1932 had been marked by progressive developments, friendly relations and co-operation between the two countries. “Since the Government of the United Kingdom is thus unable to accept the assumption that lasting friendship cannot be attained on the basis of present relationship it does not see any grounds for answering a question which is founded on that assumption.” states Britain’s reply. “It cannot believe the Irish Free State Government contemplates a final repudiation of its treaty obligation in the manner suggested, consequently it docs not feel called upon to say what attitude it will adopt in circumstances which they regard as purely hypothetical. His Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom feels that free intercourse on equal terms with other members of the British Commonwealth, which the Irish Free State has enjoyed under the treaty settlement culminating in the Statute of Westminster, is the surest proof of their freedom to work out their own destiny within the commonwealth. The British Government believes the natural associations between the two countries are such that a close and friendly relationship between them is essential to their full prosperity, and I would once again emphasize that his Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom is and always has been, most sincerely anxious to work in friendly co-operation with the Irish Free State as a member of the British Commonwealth. Matter For The Two Countries. Relying to the leader of the Opposition, Mr George Lansbury, Mr Thomas emphasized that as the dispute arose through the repudiation by the Free State of the obligations of the AngloIrish Treaty it was a matter between the two countries. He did not wish to bring any other dominion into it. The British Government’s desire and intention was not to close any door to an honourable settlement. Prior to reading the despatches Mr Thomas had been asked if he would bring to the notice of Irish Free State citizens, both in the United Kingdom and the Free State, the loss they would suffer both in status and in the way of entering the United Kingdom from the declaration of the Irish Free State as a republic. The Minister replied: No. I do not feel that any steps such as those indicated are necessary. The contingency has not arisen and I hope never will arise. The further advantages enjoyed by British subjects as compared with aliens in this country are sufficiently well known and appreciated. Mr Lansbury: I cannot imagine that you want Britain and the dominions to believe this question does not concern them. Mr Thomas: Any question of one member leaving the British Commonwealth naturally affects the dominions. Similarly the House of Commons obviously will be informed of developments. GRAVE SITUATION “ANOTHER COUNTRY’S AGGRESSION.” (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 7.55 p.m.) London, December 6. Mr de Valera, replying to a deputation protesting against the sentence imposed on 12 Republicans for attacking General O’Duffy, said the Free State was in the midst of a grave crisis due to another country’s aggression. Every act of disorder incited the aggressors and tended to discredit the Free State abroad. While Mr de Valera is still balancing one leg within the Empire and one outside, the country bleeds economically. The Free State lives in a hypothetical republic and her people’s citizenship of the Empire is also hypothetical. The only thing not hypo-

thetical is the collapse of trade and certainty of an increase in taxation, leading to doubts whether the Free State will return Mr de Valera when he risks his election. BRITAIN’S REPLY MODERATION AND GOOD SENSE. (United Press Assn—Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 7.0 p.m.) London, December 6. Lobby opinion considers that the Government’s reply to Mr de Valera is adroit and characterized by moderation and good, sense, particularly in refusing to be drawn into a hypothetical discussion. The Dublin correspondent of the Daily Telegraph says that had Mr Thomas declared that Britain would meet the establishment of a republic with, aggressive action Mr de Valera would have appealed to the country and the election might well have gone in his favour. A high authority assured the correspondent that an election was now unlikely.