BALFOURISM

New Zealand Tablet, Volume XVI, Issue 26, 19 October 1888, Page 29

BALFOURISM

Thb following letters over the signature of " A Scotchman," have appeared in one of theOamaru papers: — TO THE EDITOB. Bib, — Pome cablegrams have recently been published conveying tbe singular intelligence that Mr. Balfour, the Irish Secretary, maintains that." kindness ' has be in the prevai ing treatment of his Government towards Ireland and its political p.isoners. If he has anived at this extraordinary conclusion honestly, it iB a melancholy illustration how ignorance, prejudice, and autocratic feeling, obscure the mental tisioi of men who are presumed to be capable of occupying high and responsible positions. That Mr. Balfour should also assert that if a local Parliament ba given to Ireland, it would be necessary to "reconquer Ireland," proves his total incapacity to grasp and act upon the only principles of government that are applicable at this stage of tbe world's history. Tbe Home Rule detdred and demanded by Ireland, and that which I approve of, is equally desirable and almost as necessary for England, Scotland, and Wales. It doe 3 not involve in the slightest degree the possibility of separation from that Imperial Government to which each of them would contribute its fair share. The union that Mr. Balfour would maintain is a uiion that is based upon force and fear, acting upon a people help'essly weak, but profoundly touched with a sentiment <i nati malty, and a conviction that tney are treated now as if their country was only recently conquered. Canada and Australia wou dto day beia the same rebel li vis and discontented condiion as Ireland, had the Biitish Government continued a similar podcy as that which Mr. Balfour and the U' iooists so perversely mnintaiu. hut the sound statesmanship which granted self-govern-ment to these off-shoots of the Empire, has preve ited snch a hi le)us calamity, and loyalty of the risjht nature is the prevaili g feeling of these countiiis. fhe Tory Governments, that would f iree the maintenance ot a union that was obtained by force and bribery, and to which Ireland, properly jepresented, would never have consented and never has to this hour, are dete mined never to yield to any demands from Ireland. It matte' s not what they are, nor in what manner they are desired or deman 1> d. The history of the last 88 years shows that peaceful soli it a* ion by constitutional means ii ineffectual, and that violent measures of agitation and combination are equal iy powerless to ensure redress. They de9p se the first, proclaiming Ireland to bj content because peaceful, and they denounce the other, because they savour of rebellion. Ireland is t ius paced " between the devil and the deep sea.'" But, thanks to her noble-minded, self-sacrificing patriots, she has, bit by bit, got some of her righteous claims attended to. The p> esing of the Emancipation Act and the abolition of that cruel anachronism of an English Church largely supported from Irish funds, have been obiained. No one would now dare to advocate a return to snch absuid anomalies, but they were as seriously advocated at one time as being necessaiy for Ireland as the so-called Union is now by Mr. Haifourami his assocta c?. The revolution of ihe wheel of time and the enlightenment of the electors may soon place a " mandate " in the hrtnds of their opponents to grant the full demand of the lr sh peopK What, then, will be the position of the Tory Unionists ? Their opposition to the carrying- >ut of the mandate — especially if on the hnt-s of Lord Randolph Churchill's menaces— would smell of treason. If tbe peculiar " kindness" of Mr. Baltour be then mc.ci out to them, I wouder how he will regard it. Will he maintain it to be sweet aud reasonable that tbey ph'iuld be treated as common criminals? Or would ih' fi lends of Ball v' consider it charitable work and conducive to the amity betwien tbe two countries, were he t) be done to death as poor idandeville was 1 I trow not. They would use another word besides "kin 4 ne-s" for such a'locious and lllegil punishment. But, mirabile dictu -Mr. B> four has been defending Christianity against Pobidvi ism. If Chiistunity is to be judged by deeds and not thts words of auch a champion, 1 will back Positivism to win. All its supporters cry out against iuch an advocate. Has he not learned that where coercion has failed love has conquered, where th« law of compulsion was trampled upon tbe law of love and gospel charity have constrained a loyal obedience ? If he would know how to rule Ireland, let him learn from Scripture how even the Almighty (with reverence be it spoken) had to abandon the threatenings of forceful law, and replace them by the constraints of gratitude. So let it be with Ireland. I will be surprised if Bilfour himself be not surprised at the inevitable result. Let it be tried. If a failure, the reconquering of Ireland b. mighty Kngland would be but an amusing episode as compaiel with the prolonged agony of a coercive rolicy that is fruit'ess of everything but the production of miserable discontent. A'a«, tur Christianity ! if it has to depend upon the advocacy of a man like Balfour, whose instinct* an t training are wholly with the high and mighty, and who knows not what meaueth the " brotherhood of man.'

In my letter reflecting on Mr. Balfour and his peculiar method of pacifymg Irelnni, and deprecating his defence of Christianity when hip deeds are 80 entuely opposed to the spirit of the gospel, I indicated an opinion, that Home Hule was desirable for Scotland. Ii has always appeared incomprehensible to me why intelligent men cannot perceive bow utterly impossible it is for the Imperial Paniameot, constituted as it is, to give justice in matters appartainicg simply to the internal concerns of countries, as parts of the Empire. I will illustrate my meaniDg by reierriDg to momentous decision • in

the past, and to serious questions that will in the near future require settlement. It is know aas a fact that when the gfeat Di*uption efT the Church of Scotland was brought about in 1843, the claims of thi v •' non-intrusion " party— now the Free Ohurch — were disallowed and rejected by Parliament. How could it havf been otherwise T The large majority of English and Irish members, who neither knew nor cared for the independence of the Ohurch, over-ruled the handful of Sooteh members. And now as the result of legislation by an united Parliament, we witness an Established Ohurch in Scotland that does not adequately represent the wishes of the people. Had the question— t purely national one — been left to a local parliament in Scotland, there can be no doubt that no breaking up of the National Ohuroh would have taken place. Aad now there looms in the near distance the still greater and more far-reaching problem of the disestablishment of that remnant of the Ohurch of Scotland, which, from its comparative non- representation of the people, is an anachronism. Can the solution of such a question be, in any fairness, left to a Parliament composed of a majority of men who know nothfag of 'he subject, further than what is antagonistic to aiything like disestablishment? It will ever be regretted if it be allowed to coma up for decision to such a tribunal— and it should be kept in abeyance until Home Rule be secured for Scotland— a result as certain as that it will shortly be gained for Ireland. There are important question* affecting Scotland, and it only, that no Imperial Parliament can cope with, or should indeed be permitted to attempt if the wishes of the country affected are to be consulted »ud granted. The same principle applies to England and W*le^ especially the latter ; for why should Scotchmen or Irishmen interfera with matters of which they are profoundly ignorant, or superciliously oareless, or prejedaoially opposed to ? That is my case for Home Bule for each of the countries named, and of the working of which there is tbe satisfactory illustration of the United States. Each state has its own Government, but all are united and take part in the legislation and policy of Amerioa aa a gre\t power amongst the nations ot the earth. If there be a serious fl.*w in my argument let it be produced and enforced, for I an open to conviction. A Scotchman.