THE ENGLISH CLERGY’S PROTEST: MR. LLOYD GEORGE’S LETTER

New Zealand Tablet, 21 July 1921, Page 28

THE ENGLISH CLERGY’S PROTEST: MR. LLOYD GEORGE’S LETTER

About a fortnight ago (says the Manchester Guardian , for April 22) many eminent dignitaries of the Established and other Churches sent a letter to Mr. Lloyd George protesting against the methods adopted by the Government for the suppression of crime in Ireland and calling for a truce and “a deliberate effort after an agreed solution of the Irish difficulty.” It was a weighty document supported by weighty names. Mr. Lloyd George has now sent a lengthy rejoinder. It will, we fear, give small satisfaction to the signatories of the letter or to any other friends of England’s good name and of peace. The dreadful fact with

. which the signatories, like most other decent and candid ''persons, are concerned is the long-continued and widespread persistence of murder and other forms of outrage by the agents of the Government as a means of meeting similar outrages by the agents of Sinn Fein. It is a terrible and disgraceful competition, and unhappily it persists to this day. The signatories demand that it should cease, and Mr. George does not defend it. He pleads provocation, which no doubt is real enough, and he denies that there has been “any authorisation or condonation” to such a policy. He claims that, on the contrary, the Government 1, has always discountenanced such acts of indiscipl line and has pressed on its representatives the I need of “ the sternest discipline.” He admits that “deplorable excesses” have been committed, but claims that considerable improvement has now taken place in the discipline of the Auxiliary division, commonly - ,known as the “Black-and-Tans,” who are chiefly responsible. The force has been weeded out, quite a number have been court-martiailed and dismissed. What more could a blameless Government do?

Now it is just as well to be frank about this business, because it is not only half a dozen bishops and the leaders of Nonconformity who have to be impressed; it is half the world. The excesses are not denied. They continue on both sides in practically undiminished flood. Some questions have to be asked. This is not a question- of a few isolated outrages, It is a policy. We do not say it is the policy of the Government, but it has for many months been the policy of its agents. What have the Government

done to stop it? Has anybody been punished? Dismissal is not a very heavy penalty for murder and arson, and for how long have even dismissals been going on? and what are a few score dismissals in a force of 15,000 men? Mr. George denies with indignation that this policy of indiscriminate and unauthorised violence by the agents of the Government has been condoned, but there is such a thing as condonation by silence as well as by speech. When has Mr. George himself spoken one word of honest reprobation ? . When until to-day has he even admitted that there has been anything to reprobate? Such a word from him would have had a great and salutary effect. It would have been understood by the heads of the army and police in Ireland; it would have given a new tone to the administration. It was never spoken. What do we see on the other side? The Strickland Report suppressed, as though the wanton destruction of two or three millions’ worth of property in a single city, without, so far, any sort of compensation to the victims, were a matter on which the public here, who are responsible for the acts of their Government, had not a right to be informed Judge Bodkin forbidden to hear claims for wanton injury to property where the police or military are alleged to be responsible, because he has dared to tell the truth about previous excesses; the press more and more heavily censored, and for all the havoc that goes on no one brought to justice. No one denies the provocation. It is no answer to say that there have been crimes on the other side. Of course there have, terrible and ghastly crimes, and they constitute a deep and lasting stain on the movement for Irish freedom, which they dishonor and do their best to destroy. But it is necessary to understand as well as to denounce them. The signatories of the letter have done this. They have pointed out that this is no “mere outbreak of criminality in the ordinary sense,” but is the foul outcome of a sense of intolerable wrong. To recognise that was, we should suppose, the beginning of wisdom in this dreadful matter, for the office of the statesman is to understand and to cure, and how can he cure if he does not understand? But Mr. George, it would seem, has no use for statesmanship, and he breaks out into righteous denunciation of the leaders of the Churches who have dared to look a little below the surface in search of a remedy for terrible evils. They pointed out that these murders were not causeless, and ho accuses them of justifying murder as a means to an end because they pointed to its cause. They will probably regard the charge as the measure of his own capacity.

Surely the matter is too grave for such childishness, and we need not despair of Mr. George because, in his distress, he has tried to take the offensive and preaches morality to the bishops. After all, he has great power—far too great power for any one man —and corresponding responsibility, and, having shot his rhetorical bolt, he may see fit now to turn to business. He tells us that he is “willing to discuss any and every road which promises to lead to reconciliation.” That is precisely what the bishops want. Why does he not begin? It is his business to take the first step. He says he will not surrender to force. No one wants him to. He says that “so long as Sinn Fein demands a Republic and refuses to accept loyally membership of the. British Commonwealth” and to grant to the Ulster minority “the same rights as it claims for itself” the struggle must go on. Why does he not try to see if Sinn Fein will take a little less than it asks, and how is this ever to be discovered if no steps are taken to inquire? It is perfectly idle to talk in generalities like this and to expect that Sinn Fein will come forward and confess its sins without knowing in the least what it is to get in return for any possible concession. The recognised authority in the Sinn Fein organisation is the Dail Eir—that is, the whole body of elected Irish Nationalist members. Why does not Mr. George summon them, release those who are in gaol, give them all safe permits, and get to work? It will have to be done in the end, for there is no other way, and this way is as safe as it is wise and honorable. What is the matter with, Mr. George that he does not follow his natural instinct for action and for compromise? Lack of courage is not one of his faults, nor lack of resource either. It is time he'brought his faculties into play. . There is need for all of them., ' v .