HOME RULE BILL.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1430, 3 May 1912, Page 5

HOME RULE BILL.

PROTESTANTS' SAFEGUARD' GRIP OF IRISH PARLIAMENT. . j IMPRACTICABLE FINANCE, By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright, (lioc. May; 2, 11.25 p.m.) London, May 2. Sir I?. B. Findlny (Unionist) warned tho Government that porsistenco of tho Home Rule Bill would mean civil war. If federation was the object, then. Ulster's claim for separate treatment was irresistible. Colonel Seely, Under-Secretary for War, said that if tho Nationalist leaders meant what they said, religious intolerance and persecution would be impossiblo. Ho believed tho Irish would work the Bill honourably, and make Ireland a bulwark of British liberties. Mr, "William O'Brien declared that tho Bill would effect reconciliation, but tho financial proposals wcro impracticable and could not bo final. Tho truest safeguard would ha to giro tho I'rostestanta a fiITQ grip of the Irish Parliament. Half tho Senators and a fourth of the Commoners should bo Protestant Unionists. , MOTION BY LABOUR MEMBERS. (Rec. May 3, 0.10 a.m.) London, May 2. Writing to Mr. Thome relative to his notice of motion, Sir E. Carson insists that Mr. Thorne demand that tho Government afford him an opportunity to provo the charges. Sir Edward Carson adds this is tho elementary principle of our liberty, that all men and bodies, except trado unions, aro equal before tho law. Ho did not claim any immunity. Mr. Thorne, in replying, said the motion had not been readied, but that ho in-, tends to ask the Government to facilitate discussion. On April 1 Messrs. Thorne, Lansburv, and O'Gradv (Labour members) gave notice of motion for April 21, calling for tho removal of Lord Londonderry, Sir E. Carson, Mr. Thomas Andrews Sinclair, and Mr. John Young from the Privy Council-lors-hip for Ireland, for treasonable speeches. The motion regrets that tho Government, when prosecuting poor men in England for sedition, neglected to prosecute rich men in Ireland.