CANADA AND HOME RULE

New Zealand Tablet, 12 May 1910, Page 732

CANADA AND HOME RULE

In a speech at the St. Patrick’s Day banquet at Montreal, Sir Thomas Shaughnessy, president of the Canadian Pacific Railway, responding to the toast of 1 Canada,’ gave a glowing description of the country’s progress, and emphasised the harmony prevailing between the people and the loyalty of everybody to the Crown and Empire. Continuing, he said:With reference to Home Rule, I would like to devote a few words to another subject that appeals to every man of Irish birth or extraction, wherever he may live, and that is the prompt, and effective amelioration of what are manifestly Ireland’s wrongs, with an improvement in the position of her people that would surely result from such a policy. For generations there has been something in the nature of a feud between the people of Great Britain—or, I should say, of the governing class of Great Britain —and the Irish. At times the feeling on one side or the other has grown so intense as to lead to lawlessness, and consequent reprisals. Neither party has been free from blame. On the one hand, there was the overbearing audacity of a class, actuated by selfishness and assumed superiority. On the other, the wrath and vindictiveness of a people who felt that they were being subjected to humiliation and cruel treatment. In both cases there were doubtless other motives and other incentives, to which I need not now refer; but I must declare my conviction that in the. relations between Ireland and other portions of the British Empire there is a situation That Should Not and Cannot Longer Continue. The direction of world-thought and world-actions has in recent years been towards conciliation and compromise. Great employers of men have learned the lesson that they can no longer say, ‘ My will, and mine alone, will prevail.’ They now see that intelligence and the capacity for analysis and discussion have extended down the line, and that they must discuss, and that they must analyse, and that they must compromise, and the world is the better for it. The new order of things occasionally leads to exaction'and disorder, but time will tame the aggressive spirit of the organised forces, and better things will result. The great employer has lost none of his prestige or power of accomplishment, but has learned to regard the rights of others as well as his own rights. After a reference to the establishment of Constitutions in Russia and Turkey and of The Hague tribunal, Sir Thomas Shaughnessy went on;While nations and individuals in all other portions of the world have been undergoing this change of heart and reaching a better understanding, is it to be believed that England and Ireland can remain in their present illogical and unnatural attitude towards each other? The Land Purchase Act has accomplished a great deal; but why stop there? Ireland is entitled to and should have local self-government, as should England, Scotland, and Wales, if they want it. In the case of Ireland separation is as undesirable as it is impossible, and there may be other features of the Home Rule programme that require modification or elimination; but why should the opponents of the Irish Party dwell upon and emphasise only the features of the Irish proposals to which they have the most decided objection ? Why not take up and discuss the other sections about which agreement might be possible? In the eyes of the opponents of Home Rule there are Two Dominating and All-absorbing Bogies to the exclusion of everything else, namely, the control of affairs in Ireland by. a,predominating Catholic majority to the detriment and discomfort of the minority, and the idea that the whole scheme of Home Rule aims at separation. Those of us who know our fellow-countrymen best would give but little weight to the first of these apprehensions, because the maintenance of a cohesive majority for any long period would be contrary to the nature and tradition of Irishmen. But even if this were not the case it would be quite practicable to provide constitutional safeguards against injustice or oppression; and about the other I have already expressed the conviction that separation would not be in the interests of the Irish people, and for many reasons it would be impracticable; indeed, impossible and should not stand as a bar to a rational Home Rule measure. I cannot help feeling that the position of affairs m Canada, where the people are enjoying the fruits of good government, and more particularly in Quebec, where a comparatively small minority is living in peace, happiness" and contentment with a majority belonging to another race and religion, might suggest to the law-makers of the motherland on both sides of the Irish question a line of procedure and a form of legislative compact that would have the effect of removing an ugly sore from the body politic of the Empire by according to Ireland the control of her own internal affairs, obliterating the conditions that have discouraged her population, stimulated strife and violence and prevented the introduction of capital and enterprise

to the country. How gratifying it would be to us if Canada’s British North - America Act should illustrate the way and the means.