The Waikato Times With which is Incorporated The Waikato Argus. THURSDAY, MAY 8, 1924. THE IRISH DISPUTE.

Waikato Times, Volume 97, Issue 15981, 8 May 1924, Page 4

The Waikato Times With which is Incorporated The Waikato Argus. THURSDAY, MAY 8, 1924. THE IRISH DISPUTE.

The situation an Ireland is far from | reassuring, although it is not in any way new, for it has been a trouble which has threatened from the time when Home Rule was granted. The Nationalists claim that the Counties of Tyrone and Fermanagh should be detached from Ulster and added to the Free State, because the majority of the population desire to make this change. There does not seem to be any doubt that a majority are of this' opinion, but in spite of it the Ulster Government arc unwilling to surrender any part of their territory. When the agreement with the Irish representatives was reached, an arrangement was made that a Commission should be set up to adjust the boundaries. The Nationalists understood this to mean that the counties in dispute can change their allegiance. The Ulster Government contends that it docs not go beyond some small adjustments. Most people would wonder why a matter which was so capable of creating friction should have been left in a vague and undetermined manner, but the truth is that there was' much difficulty in reaching any agreement at all, and if this point had been stressed, it might never have been reached. The dispute is the more difficult to settle because it turns upon a sentiment, whereas if some definite interest were involved a compromise of some kind might be possible. The Ulster Government have refused to appoint any representative lo the Boundary Commission which the British Government has instituted. The Earl of Birken- j head, who negotiated the Treaty, has advised Sir James Craig to do so, although he holds' that the Nationalist claim is not justified. It is said, however, that other legal opinion holds | that they are within their rights. A Commission would doubtless recommend that the counties in dispute should be handed to the Nationalists'. Sir James Craig’s objection to a Commission makes this tolerably clear. It only requires to state the case to show that the claim which Ulster makes to retain a population whose sympathies lie with Southern Ireland cannot be justified, and the error of what has been done in the past makes this additionally clear. When it had been decided to grant Home Rule, the question was put to the people of Northern Ireland whether they desired to retain the whole of Ulster, and if not what counties they would surrender. Throughout the prolonged struggle over Home Rule prior to the war, the claim had been made for the whole of Ulster, and the threat to resist any change by force of arms was openly made. It was I pointed out that this meant civil war, but the Ulster men were prepared to go to these lengths, and Mr Bonar Law, speaking as leader of the Conservative Party, said that they were with them in this matter. Nevertheless the Ulster leaders, after long consideration, decided to surrender the Counties of Cavan, Donegal, and Monaghan. Their claim is not to Ulster as a geographical entity, but to such portions of Ulster as object to union with Southern Ireland. They cannot, therefore, assert any equitable claim to retain two counties which desire to leave them. There is, of course, talk about preparation for war, and movements of mysterious troops on the borders. Such rumours caused much disquiet prior to the late war, but a generation which has seen fighting on the scale of 1914 to 1918 is likely to be less moved. Nevertheless the whole incident is awkward and unpleasant to the last degree, and reflects upon the Government of Southern Ireland as much as upon the Government of Ulster. The claim is entirely justified, but that is not sufficient warrant for bringing it forward. The Nationalists' have always desired that there should be but the one Government for the whole of Ireland. If they had shown patience this might have come to pass, but to attempt to force the matter is bound to lead to a continuance of the determined objection to union. It is the old problem of coercion as against persuasion. There may be some mischievous pleasure in humiliating Ulster, but such pleasure is dearly bought if it is going to postpone or prevent the union of Ulster with the Free State. Home Rule is not the ideal Government for Ireland, which would ; have been happier and more prosper- j ous if she could have accepted union i with England as Scotland has done. q>he history of the past makes this impossible, and one of ‘the chief factors in the history is the spirit of ascendancy. which Ulster is showing us she still retains. If, however, Home Rule is inevitable, we may reasonably wish it to be as successful as possible, and the Union of Ulster with the Free State would benefit both. There is a prevalent opinion that Ulster possesses all the wealth and business enterprise in Ireland. So far as wealth is' concerned this is very far from being tiue. The legislation which made it possible for the Irish tenant to buy his farm gave large numbers an opportunity in life. The high prices of produce during the war made thousands of small farmers wealthy, and it is’ largely the money of Southern Ireland that finances the industries of Belfast. Such things as a..

Customs tariff between the two parts of the island are a ridiculous anomaly, for their economic interests are interwoven. Ulster people have strong dislikes to the Free State, and profess great loyalty to Britain. There can be no doubt of their loyalty, but it is loyalty with a difference. They are Irishmen first, and are torn between their feeling for Ireland and their prejudices against Catholic Irishmen. The action of President Cosgrave and his Cabinet is likely to increase the prejudices, and nullify the influences which make for union, so that though we may think Ulster to be quite wrong, we cannot acquit the Free. Slate of the charge of making a silly mistake, a blunder as bad as a crime.