THE HOME RULE BILL

New Zealand Tablet, 6 March 1913, Page 23

THE HOME RULE BILL

READ A THIRD TIME IN THE COMMONS.. A MAGNIFICENT MAJORITY. The third Home Rule Bill has been carried by the magnificent majority of 110 (says the Irish Press Agency). That is a much better majority than its supporters anticipated or than its opponents reckoned upon. A few minutes after the Bill passed its Third Reading in the House of Commons, it was taken to the House of Lords, and given a formal First Reading by the Peers. The debate in the Commons was memorable for the speeches delivered by the Premier (Mr. Asquith), Mr. John Redmond, and Mr. Birrell (the Chief Secretary for Ireland). These speeches were worthy of the theme, and of the highest traditions of Parliamentary eloquence. If there was nothing remarkable about the other speeches, few or none of which rose above the normal-, and some of which, notably F. E. Smith's, were beneath mediocrity, the setting and surroundings of the debate were in keeping with the dignity, the solemnity, and the importance which characterise the Mother of Parliaments on a great and epoch-making occasion. Public Interest. The public interest in the debate was keen, even intense. For weeks previously, members of all parties had been besieged by applications for tickets of admission to the galleries, and those fortunate enough to obtain admission remained in their seats as long as possible. Irishmen and Irishwomen from all parts of the world

were represented, and high Church dignitaries and priests from America, Australia, and New Zealand, with others from Ireland and Great Britain, sat beside Nationalist and democratic leaders from near and far, who had borne a share in the great struggle of which they were witnessing the triumph and the consummation ; In the ladies' gallery, the wives and mJ. ~ m Irish ambers sat side by side with blueblooded Tory peeresses and fair daughters of the aristocracy. Outside, in the Strangers' Lobby, a crowd, growing larger as the debate proceeded, waited patiently, hour after hour, and day after day, to catch fragments of news as to how the fight went on, and when, eventually, an Irish member rushed out and announced the result of the final division, the crowd demonstrated its sympathies by loud and prolonged ft r «. H °S e Rul6 - L ° n S after the last member had left the House, and the last taxicab had rolled away from Palace Yard, little knots of Irishmen and Irishwomen of the working-classes, many of them who had never seen eland remained about the precincts of Westminster, discussing the great event, cheering for Ireland and Home Rule, or singing snatches of Irish songs. Home Rule is essentially a workers' cause, and no section of Irish workers have done more to speed its triumph than 'the Irish garrison in Great Britain,' S ? u m ?r7 h ? gaVe Allen ' Larkin > and O'Brien, and Michael Davitt to the cause of Irish liberty. MR. ASQUITH'S SPEECH. mi* It is a pity that the Premier's speech could not be put into the hands of every friend, and, indeed, of every opponent of Home Rule. It was a masterpiece of eloquence and argument, but what Irishman will like best m it is its outspoken and uncompromising justification of Ireland's claim to nationhood, and its firm and emphatic refusal to consent to what Mr. Redmond has aptly described as 'the mutilation of our country' by the exclusion of Ulster from the Bill. The Unionists were all wrong, the Premier said, in regardSHhe Anglo-Irish difficulty as beginning with the Act of Union. But however that might be, the Irish Nationa--7 was an ° rganised ' *»•**. - 'We cannot ignore this: that, if vou reject this Bill, you would find still standing'in your pati what is, and remains with undiminished vitality, the organised articulate and permanent expression of the political demand of the vast majority of the Irish people. That is the vital fact of the situation. That is the thing you have got to face.' Ireland a Nation. \™A?*i common argument of Unionism is that Ireland r S claim to nationality is not recognised or met under the Bill. Of course, the Irish people are the best judges of that, and they have everywhere and in fullest sense accepted the Bill. But Mr. Asqnith's remembering lmP ° rtaat P ° lnt is ° rth » ad h^l do not belie he said, 'it is possible for anybody, on paper or m a speech, to define what nationality 13 or means. Judged by any criterion that has ever been suggested by any authority on the sublet I conceive that Ireland well satisfies itf Mr. Parne 1 once used a phrase, often quoted, to show that the Irish members cannot accept this Bill in satisfaction of their national demands. The phrase he used was that it was impossible to set bounds to the nationhood of a people (Hon. Members: 'The march of a nation.') ' Hi It does not follow, and that is why this dilemma be' comes so unreal, when you bring i/down to S leW of experience and concrete fact-that the nation might no retain all that makes it such, but have complete autonomy m regard to all its own local affairs, and* ye? be a member of incorporation and have a voice as such member, m the affairs of a larger political whole If you are going to rule out, as not having attained he stature of a nation, or having ■ fallen shirt of the stature of a nation, countries which do not comply with those conditions, you will have to begin by ruling out Scotland and Wales, and end by rulingout Australia and all our great self-governing doming v... ...,- We give the Irish Parliament powers which

certainly no Dominions give to sub-ordinate provinces in regard to taxation.' Ulster. On the Ulster question, the Premier's words are of vital import, because he said they expressed ' my own matured views, and, I believe, of the whole of my colleagues, with regard to this matter.' Here they are: —' But to say that a minority, before actual wrong has been, or can be, done them, upon the suspicion or apprehension that in defiance of the terms of an Act of Parliament and of the supreme authority of the Imperial Parliament, they may peradventure, at some future day be injured or oppressed— say that a minority is entitled on such grounds to thwart and defeat the constitutional demand of the vast majority of their fellow countrymen and to frustrate a great international settlement, is a proposition which in my opinion does not, and never will, commend itself either to the conscience or to the judgment of the British people.. That is our answer. That is the statement of our case in regard to Ulster.' This view, in these actual words, was first expressed by Mr. Asquith, at the great meeting in Dublin, last summer, and it has been endorsed by Mr. Redmond, for himself and for the Irish nation. It binds the Liberal Cabinet and the Liberal Party, and it means that, so far as they are concerned, Ulster will stand or fall with the rest of Ireland. The importance of this fact, in view of the future of the Bill, cannot be exaggerated. Some Incidents.. Mr. John Redmond had the assent of the whole assembly, when he expressed regret at the absence of Sir Edward Carson (the leader of the Irish Unionists), owing to the illness of £he latter's wife. Mr. T. P. O'Connor followed Mr. Charles Craig with a speech in T.P.'s best and most effective Parliamentary form. Mr. Mark Sykes, a typical English Tory Catholic, exhibited to the full the ignorance and prejudice of his class against Ireland. And a tragi-comic interlude was afforded by Mr. Wm. O'Brien, who began by indulging in fulsome praise of Mr. Balfour and 'his great work of Imperial statesmanship in Ireland,' which 'will live/as the most enduring monument of his life ' After his apotheosis of Mr. Balfour, Mr. O'Brien naturally turned to depreciation of Mr. T. P. O'Connor and Mr. John Redmond; and then, having found fault with the finance and the powers of the Bill, with characteristic consistency he proceeded to say: 'We can and do accept the Bill with all our hearts as a sincere and courageous message of peace to Ireland.' Mr O'Brien was quite serious. Mr. F. E. Smith (' Orange Smith ' of Ulster Covenant week') contributed a fourth-rate debating-society speech, which, however, was interesting, as exhibiting the bankruptcy of brains on the front Opposition bench; and Mr. Samuel Young, now in his ninety-first year, speaking as a Nationalist, linked uo the Repeal movement of O'Connell with the Irish movement of to-day. MR. REDMOND'S SPEECH. Mr. John Redmond's speech ranks with Mr. Asquith s as one of the two great speeches of the debate He spoke to a crowded House, and was listened to with almost breathless attention, even on the Unionist benches. He challenged the Tory Party to say, now that they had abolished food taxes, what was their alternative policy to Home Rule. Then he showed how the majorities for the Bill all through-have been above the normal Government majority. Then he accepted the Bill for Ireland in the very words used by Parnell in regard to the Bill of 1886. The financial settlement was not as generous as he could have wished Admittedly, it was provisional, but it left the way dear for complete fiscal autonomy. And then he came to the Ulster question. Ulster said it would not submit even it both British parties were agreed upon Home Rule. Ihat was Ulster's attitude. His attitude, and that of the vast maiority of the Tri«?li nor,ni Q -,„ no „„ , T-r-i , j j -- - ■"—. ,/as to regard Ulstermen as brother Irishmen, and invite them to join in emancipating and governing their common country , But there was one thing Nationalists declined to do, and that was to permit any section, any

small minority of the Irish people, to overawe the overwhelming majority. Tory objections to the Bill were founded on traditional mistrust of the people. Bonar Law had called for a storm, but the storm had not come. And then Mr. Redmond began a peroration of wonderful power and beauty, which held the House spellbound, and which those who heard will never forget. In that solemn moment, he recalled briefly the story of Ireland s struggle for freedom ; of her hope, that never grew weary; of her courage, which never despaired; of the four generations of his own family who had been sent to that House to press Ireland’s demand; of the veterans on the Irish benches around him; and of the people who had carried on the fight from father to son. The end was in sight. There was no fear now of the tragedy of a defeat, the end of which no man could foresee. The Irish race the world over was awaitrng the fate of the Bill. The nations of the civilised world would welcome its passage. In Gladstone’s words, gain the star of Ireland has mounted in the heavens.'