The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1905. IRELAND AND HOME RULE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 43, 20 February 1905, Page 4

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News and The Echo.

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1905. IRELAND AND HOME RULE.

War tha camae ti»t lack* aaaixounea, far **• terong thai tietd* rrriitamtm, fmr tha future w» t_e dittAaco, May* tha good tliat «_ nam dm.

The eriticisw to which the Irish UnderSecretary has just been subjected in the House of Commons is only one ol many proo_fe of the an-yiety end suspjciGu with whicii the Unionists are watching the attitude oi Government toward the Nationalists. Of late years political exigencies h_*c persuaded the Conjservative party to treat the Irish Parliamentary contingent in a very conciliatory

spirit, and since the appointment of Mr Wyndham as Chief Secretary there has been a distinct reaction in favour of the policy once described as "killing Home Rule with kindness." The appointment of Sir Anthony Maedonnell as UnderSecretary to ihe Lord-Lieutenant was regarded as a masterstroke by those who hope to appease the demand for Home Rule by minor concessions. There is np doubt about Sir A. Macdonnell's ability, bnt he is a professed Home Ruler, the brother of a Nationalist M.P.. and a rigid Roman Catholic, holding Ultra_LG«taine views, so that he is from every standpoint extremely obnoxious to the Ulster Unionists. Nor can it be said that the Under-Secretary has made much pretence cf using his power impartially. Colonel Saunderson lately stated in public that the Ulster Unionists bad blocked I the two Irish bills brought down by i Government this year, "a, a protest against ti:e continued power of Sir A. Maedonceil in Ireland." With punlic J feeling in this excited state, it was not , to be expected that the Under-Secre- i tary's connection with Lord Dunraven's I "devolution" scheme would pass im- j i noticed, and Mr Wyndham has had to | explain that Sir A. Maedonnell has been i | practically censured by Government for ! his oHieial indiscretions.

The scheme proposed by Lord Dun--raven for ihe better government of Ireland throws aa interesting light upon the present position of the Home Rule controversy. In September last Lord D_nr_ven and a number of Irish landowners, members of the new Irish Re-

form Association, drew up a series of resolutions suggesting methods by which the most serious difficulties iv the -way of Home Rule for Ireland might be evaded or compromised. The three chief proposals are (1) "That an Irish legislative body should be appointed to deal with '"much of the business relating to Irish i affairs whieb Parliament at present is unable to cope with"; (2) that an Irish ________'Council should take over from the Treasury the control of purely Irish expenditure; (3) that a Royal Commission should be appointed to receive opinions and proposals on these subjects, and inquire into details. The proposed Irish Parliament might be composed of Irish representative peers, the Irish members of the House of Commons, and ■ members of the new Financial Council. I which itself might consist of 12 elected aud 12 nominated members, including the Chief Secretary. But we need not follow Lord Dunraven's scheme in greater detail. The object of it manifestly is to give a more or less definite share of Home Rule to Ireland by widening the area of local self-government, and by decentralising tbe legislative authority. The Financial Council would deal with an annual expenditure of about £6,000.000, and the new legislature would assume a great deal of the responsibility now borne by the House of Commons in governing Ireland. The principle of enlarging local powers for these purposes seems to us highly commendable, but the extreme Unionists immediately fell foul of Lord Dunraven's scheme, and demanded that Government should at once dissociate itself from this or any other scheme of "devolution." After some delay Mr Wyndham, in a letter to the "Times." formally renounced Lord Dunraven and declared that '-the Unionist Government is opposed to the multiplication of legislative bodies within the United Kingdom," whether on behalf of Home Rule or otherwise. But the Unionists knew that Sir A. Maedonnell had taken a prominent part in the elaboration of the Dunraven scheme, and they have now

compelled the Government publicly to condemn him for Lis action in forwsrding a proposal tbat bears very directly upon the vexed question of Home Rule.

| Whatever we may think of the advisability of conceding Home Rule to | Ireland, there can be no doubt that the movement in its favour has received a j great impetus during the last three or four years. The policy adopted by Government since Mr. Wyndham's appointment has been too conciliatory to please the Unionists, and too generous to keep the Nationalists in check. The Tesult has been a distinct growth in the aggressiveness of the Nationalists, and greater activity on the part of the Irish Land League. That Mr. Balfour's Government is heartily tired of its task in Ireland is shown by the extremely generous nature of tbe concessions which have marked Mr. Wyndham's term pf r-ian, __yj- .i&s lcj_tu__es of the

party are stiU bound up m Unjomsj-n; and the Uoiouiits bave declared so strongly against ••devolution" in any shape that there is net xaucb hope for hgtd. Dunraven's scheme, which, in truth, differs very little m principle from Mr. glaistone's last lipme Bid? V' l V- 4 s for Sir A. Macdonnell, it is genei-glly hej_ by |tfr, _Ba!ft>ur"s followers thst his .appointment was tactically a mistake, and it is quite on the cards that he may yet be offered up by Government as a sacrifice to appease the vs-aih pf tha incensed Unionists.