THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 1924. THE IRISH BOUNDARIES.

Wairarapa Age, 7 May 1924, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 1924. THE IRISH BOUNDARIES.

The Conference of representatives of the Governments of the Irish Free State and of Northern Ireland called by Mr Ramsay Macdonald to discuss the boundary question has merely served, through its break down, to emphasise the difficulty of the problem. The Ulster Government, quite consistently, adheres to its decision to have nothing to do with the Boundary Commission for which the Irish Treaty purported to make provision. Sir James Craig’s latest pronouncement is an uncompromising “no surrender.” The British Government is thus placed in a quandary. The Conference having failed; (he Free State Government is pressing Mr Ramsay Macdonald, as forcibly as it is able, to establish the Boundary Commission without delay. But there is the question whether this can be done without the co-operation of Ulster. The Government of Northern Ireland contends that unless it appoints a representative, the Commission cannot possibly function. It is suggested that the British Government .may test the legality of this point, and, in the event of an adverse ruling, introduce amoadir.g legislation. But it is impossible to judge that tho difficulties attaching ..tjtj the situation can be overcome by sb, eoprparatiycly simple a procedure. Should aqrewting legislation be necessary this will-mean that the Ulster Government has ibcen entirely within its rights in disclaim.ing any obligation to take cognisance of the Boundary Commission, The

setting up of the Commission in such circumstances would amount to the initiation of steps by Great Britain to coerce Ulster. It is difficult to imagine a British. Government contemplating such a line of action. It would have to reflect upon the attitude of the Empire at large towards such a procedure. This could not,but be unfavourable, for an attempt to coerce Ulster would be open to interpretation as a threat against the constitutional rights possessed by the dominions. The position is complicated by the limits ef the powers of the Boundary Commission under the Treaty. There is apparently room for wide diversity of opinion on the subject, and controversy on the subject has generated more heat than light. The existence of a belief that there was an agreement with the Irish negotiators outside the actual terms of the Treaty would only tend to render the attitude of Ulster more uncompromising than otherwise. Upon this aspect of the position Lord Birkenhead, as one of the signatories to the Treaty, denies that in private interviews which took place with Mr Michael Collins and Mr Arthur Griffiths any assurance was given that was inconsistent with the terms of the Treaty. Testimony on the subject from these Irish loaders is unfortunately impossible, and it is evident that Lord Birkenhead’s statement will not silence controversy. It is most difficult to see how the bungle over the article of the Irish Treaty relating to the establishment of a Boundary Commission can be retrieved. It is no doubt very correctly affirjned that the Ramsay Macdonald Government regards the boundary question as an Irish question# and is anxious that it should be settled by Irishmen.