"IRISH AFFAIRS."

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1085, 25 March 1911, Page 7

"IRISH AFFAIRS."

Sir, —I am sorry that I have offended your correspondent, ''R.D." I was not aware that his ''Irish" is so easily put up. However, 1 did not intend to bo offensive, though ho himself seems to have a liking that way. He tells -ino that the figures supplied by ''Non-Factionist" should be an eyeopener to me. 1 don't think that they are. When lie reads my reply to "Non-Factionist" on the matter ho may agreo with me. Now, as to "R.D.'s" talk about Ireland's contribution to the national debt (not English as ho calls it). Ho has practically admitted my contention that there was no Irish debt since the union. I shall quote for "R.D.'s" instruction, also your readers, Ireland's contributions for Imperial purposes —not that I think I can'convince "It. 1).," but to show your readers the truo sido of this Irish 'question and this robbery, that "It.D." thinks fit to call it. From 1820 to 1910, Ireland has contributed in Imperial revenue £96,559,241. Out of this was expended locally £6(3,149,890, leaving a balance for Imperial purposes of £38,123,347, which is not a great sum for Britain's protection, when we consider that last year 1909-1910, Great Britain contributed £03,820,000 for Imperial purposes. I think from the above it will bo seen that, if England and Scotland had been as slow as Ireland there would not have been much talk of a "German invasion"—it would have occurred long ,ago. .Again, "It.D." misquotes me. I did not propound a theory of mismanagement in New Zealand. I was not giving my own opinion, but the opinions of other people, who believe that this is. not a theory, but a fact. However, "R.D.'s" statement that tho most suitable place for mo and certain others—l wonder who thov are? —is tho asylum. Well, it has always beeii a characteristic of somo Irishmen to shoot from behind a hedge. "R.D." believes in throwing as much mild as he can in the hope somo of it will stick. Fire away, "It.D." "It.D." refers to tho natural resources of Ireland, and says "that according to somo political and scientific officials she could support in comfort 20,000,000 of people." Again, "E.D.'s" imagination runs away-with him. Now, if the tost of population is to be the criterion, then tho first 46 years of the Act of Union was Ireland's halcyon period, for in that time the population actually trebled itself, a thing • without any paralllel in Europo. What was tho cause of tho depopulation ? As I said before Ireland was without mineral resources as a basis of manufacturing industries; agriculture was her staplo industry, and it was incapable of an expansion, commensurate with the growth of population. ■ Tho land could not support tho numbers dependent on it.' Ireland had five agricultural labourers for every two in England, and according to a commission of tho period nearly two millions of the people were dependent upon twenty weeks' work in tho year for existence. It was inevitable that a hu«e percentage of the peoplo should seek other countries less congested, or die of starvqation. This is the solo cause of tho depopulation. Wenvitnot so, there could bo no explanation whatever of the extraordinary fact that, in Belfast, and manufacturing towns like Ballymcna, Lisburn, Lurgan, Portadown, ctc., tho population has multiplied enormously at the very period when it has been declining all over tho rest of tho country. "R.D.'s" question as to tho cause of "high rents and j<jver ;7 ta^sti<JPi.'jV'J o hn..ltedmo))dvidid l iio}. think'lreland'was overtaxed when he allowed fresh taxation in tho shape of Lloyd George's Budget to _ pass. "R.D.'s" reference to tho minerals stored in Ireland is Hardly correct, or how could he account for ono of tho principal shipbuilding'firms in Great Britain (Harland and Wolff) haying to import all their raw material in the shape of pig-iron and steel from England and Scotland?—l am, etc., THOS. M. MILLIGAN. March 20, 1911.