ABOLITION OF OATH

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 75, Issue 111, 13 May 1932, Page 7

ABOLITION OF OATH

ATTITUDE OF BRITAIN WILL NOT NEGOTIATE CONTRAVENTION OF TREATY [British Official Wireless.] RUGBY, May 11. Tho Government’a attitude towards tho Irish Free State Oath Bill was further defined in the House of Commons to-day by tho Dominions Secretary, Mr J. H. Thomas. Ho was asked whether it was tho Government’r intention to enter into negotiations with tho Free State Government with regard to tho application to the Irish Free State of the Import Duties after November 15. Replying, Mr Thomas said: “The provisions contained in the Bill to abolish, the Oath are in direct conflict with the obligations undertaken by the Irish Free State under the Treaty of 1921. It appears to His Majesty’s Government that if tho Bill becomes law it would be unreasonable to expect that they should enter into negotiations for further agreements with a Government which has thus repudiated an agreement already entered into.” The Leader of tho Opposition, Mr George Lansbury, said that as the Bill had not yet been to the Free State Senate ho doubted whether it would bo of advantage to discuss the question, but when the matter was settled, he would ask for a debate..

Mr Baldwin promised favourable consideration.

LEFT TO DOMINIONS PROCEDURE AT OTTAWA WHAT STATEMENT MEANS LONDON, May 11. The Australian Press Association understands that Mr Thomas’ statement means that each Dominion is to decide for itself whether to make agreements with the Free State at Ottawa. FIRM STAND PRAISED Received Mav 12, 8.24 p.m. LONDON, May 11. Tho Daily Telegraph’s lobbyist naturally attaches great importance to Mr J. H. Thomas’ statement, which was made after a Cabinet discussion. The Conservatives generally are delighted at the Government’s firm stand, but it is explained in an authoritative quarter that tho decision docs not bind the Dominions. It is also contended that it is easy to take an over-tragic view of tho situation. The Oath Bill may be hold up in the Irish Senate and there may even be another election before it can be passed.

BUDGET PROPOSALS HEAVY TAXATION. LONDON, May li. The Irish Budget proposals include a 25 percent, tax on the hospitals’ share of the sweepstakes drawn after Marcn 1, estimated to yield £650,000; an Increase in income tax from 3s 6d to ss. bachelors being taxable on £lOO upwards; an increase in the surtax, yielding £77,000; a tea duty of fonrpeno per lb.; sugar tax reduced a halfpenny; corporation tax increased from 7|d to 10 per cent.; package tax. 2d per pa»cel; entertainment taxes, including an outdoor sports, increased; tobacco Increased by Is 2d per lb., with a rebate of 7d on raw material received by manufacturers. Gramophone records, musical instruments, clocks, watches, and cinematograph films will bo taxed, and newspaper and periodicals in bulk will be taxed 3jd per copy, with a preferential rate of a penny.

“NO OATH, NO PREFERENCE” MORNING POST’S COMMENT. Received Mav 12, 11.50 p.m. LONDON, May 12. The Morning Post, in a leader healed “No Oath; No Preference,” says that* Mr Thomas has given de Valera fair warning that if the Free State should break one agreement it cannot expect to enter another. “They vannot proclaim themes! ves a Republic and also enjov the advantages of being a Dominion,” said the Post. “This is not coercion. It is mereiy logic.” “This looks as if it moans the end of Ottawa,” was the comment in Dunlin political circles. Mr de Valera declined to make a statement. His su H porters did not appear to be alarmed. Ono said, smilingly, “We arc going on with the old Bill.”

REMOVAL BILL IN DAIL LONDON. May 6 In tho committee stage of the Oath Removal Bill in the Irish Free Rtaie Dail, an amendment which Mr Fran* McDermott (Independent) sought to move was disallowed on the ground that it introduced extraneous matter?.. The oath suggested by Mr McDermott would read: “T solemnly promise true faith and allegiance to the FretState. and during the continuance nf the Free State in tho British Commonwealth, T solemnly promise to bo lovni to the partnorshin obligations thereto involved, and to the Crown, as the symbol of that partnership. ” Mr Ernest IVythe. exMinistor of Finance, moved an Opposition amendment, to keep the oath intact in tinConstitution, but to remove tho obligation on members of tho Dail to ta»» the oath. lie said tho treaty should not be ended bv unilateral action, ana urged negotiation on the question whether the taking of tho oath should bo obligatory. The President of the Dail, Mr <i<Valera, said tho amendment was valueless. The Bill would remove dead timber from tho Constitution, and the Government did not propose at present to interfere with whatever valadity trie treaty might have.