The Dominion. SATURDAY, JANUARY 4, 1919. THE POSITION OF HOME RULE.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1639, 4 January 1913, Page 4

The Dominion. SATURDAY, JANUARY 4, 1919. THE POSITION OF HOME RULE.

■':.:,, : ; , r. :;-V .;„.:, Thb; debate upon Sib Edward Carson's Ulster amendment to '■ tho Home Rule' Bill was a Unionist success for which. Mr. Asquith '.' will hardly , find compensation in his bought majority of 87. That tho Government realised that Sir Edward Carson's and Mr. Bonar Law's/ speeches had been extromply offectivo is clear enough from the fact that jt put Mr;' Churchill up. to try the effect of violence and ab-' surdity. The tone and matter of, Mr. Churchill's speech, thb. very fact, indeed, that it was Mr. Churchill who was ;"tmt on," as the cricketers say, is evidence enough that thoGovernmont cannot face the new Unionist tactic of a quiet and reasoned statement of the Ulster case. Sir Edward Carson asked! very pertinently whether, if Natal bad refused to opine into'; the South African Union, the British Government would havo exercised legislative force upon that colony; Tho inalogy is perfectly sound. Sir EdiVARD Carson would indeed havo used a sound enough analogy if ho iad quoted the case of New Zealand ind the Australian Federation, if to are to belicvo that truth lies belind tho consensus of political opin.on that in some vital respects, and .n several less vital respects. New Zealand is a part of Australasia, ;hcn New Zealand, if the British 3ovornment_had proposed to merge is in a political Australasian Fedsration, would hardlyhave had more :ight to, complain, and to demand ;ho maintenance of tho.status quo, ;han Ulster has at the present moncnt. The analogy holds more strongly when we remembor that iust as tlioro is a not negligible Na>ionalist minority in Ulster so there vns a not negligible Federalist minjrity in New Zealand at tho bosinning of the century. Mr. Asquith's reply to this conxmtion appears to havo boon only in assurance that "when Ulster rcniscd the solid protection the Bill afiordod" it would bo quite content. For. our part, we believe that with

• I adequate safeguards—safeguarda • very, much more adequate' and extensive, of course, than those in the p Bill—Ulster' would ,: have little jm j fear H,o)no. ' ""''Mr.' CauKpniiiLJ when, his turjaf came' fx> speak,; was' at tho- 'disadvantago of following a very, damaging' Bpeecb in which Ma. Sonar clearly tho; 'tbe Unionist"'cafie * i;el,a,tihg" "to And -Mb. tIHUKCHitL'a speech was anything but happy.;' B[e. said,' that the.': amshdnient;' proposed to mctb out ixi the''''Catholics' - ''"d'f ""'Ulstp'ri exactly the. treatment..which the Op- ■ position'regarded l ai' unfair to tho I?rotes£ant3 elsewhere.'' One might almost' suspect Me, CriußOHiW'hefe -of the'''intent'' which "Mb. Bal'koue '%'*£« . tr\>»: thri" . or four months ag^. tu Vintention of its jo or w}iat t]l<) amon( j r %Wl- proposed;'was, not to subject J l !>! Nationalists of Ulster to the rule « Or a' local majority, but'simply to ftilow' them and the Unionists- to , enjoy the blessings of English' Liß r eral rule 1 'Nor waa this' tho only serious tactical mistake in the Minister's speech. : When Mr. Bonar ; Law said that he" believed, the loyalists would rather bo rilled by a' for- • eign country than'by the Nationalists, a cautious B,adiqal, remembeil- , ing'that,Mß. BonaeliAw is the pro- . tagoriist of the loyalists in their pas- • sipnatei demand to -be ruled by -tho Kino and Parliament of Britain, . would have avoided the thin ice of the only possible, retort; Here again one could V almost suspect Me. CHURoniLii\of a dfißiro to'damage the ' Bill, for ho ma.de an ext'rwrdinary ' dash on to that thin ice: the sugges: - tion. that Ulster, wantß ''to' secede to '. the side of Germany." If Ulster'and the •' leaders had "not ma(J6 it plain a million times to even tho: deafest or,blindest men in tho Kingdom that their/objection to. Dublin rule is only equalled by their anxiety for a continuance of, British rule. Me. Ohuechill might have escaped the private blame which ho will certainly receive, from his allies for this absurd suggestion, which only to emphasise' what' it is tha,b Ulster xeally desires, and..h'as. steadfastly demanded. ■ '. .'• ' ' .' : ' •' Indeed; there is hardly a point at which, tlie, Radical '.replies, to" Unionist leaders' were., not hopelessly weak., ;The most notable thing tliiit was'said in the debate was said iby : Mr. Bonar.Law,'and .it was : this, we should'say, which disturbed;the Government into' trying the"effect of a violent CHURoniLL ■. speech. "The Unionist loader.:repeated his statement that if the Government forced the' Bill'through without consulting the nation he wo'iild assist Ulster's resistance. ? .;He added, that 1 if the Goyernmont. did consult the country, and received a mandate for the Bill;' "he personally (and he believed he, spoke for the Opposition) would not en'eburago, in: any 'form,: Ulster's resistance." • This is sound Btafesraanship, .and it; is impossible that the British' Radicals will ; n6t recognise that it will be' pp. cohsidefed also by an jncroftsipg'', dumber of moderates and neutrals who had been misled into supposing that theUn'i ionist party would enoouragb" Ulster to defy Home Rulo oVen if tho ; nation as a whole' (iuihorised; It. ' For oiijf part \ye hayo always' supposed that' this was Mr, Bonar Law's position, and it is satisfactory that' it;is now ma;de so clear. The' Government eon.; tends that the country has been con/suited."At Nottingham; towards' the end of JJ.pvember, - Mr,;.-. Asquith quoted from stfme Unionist speeches in support of thi'q: contention, but, as tho Catholics and- anti-Ulster Tablet long: ago pointed "out, tho. nation was not consulted, becauso Ministers' cannot quote'a word- from tqeir '■■ own election manifestoes to show that they appealed to their people for a verdipt for Home Rule. In; point of fact,' they carefully left Ireland put of their : appeals. ; It appears to be generally'assunied-- 1 - Mr.' Cotrohidl, aesumed it -in his speech—that the House of Lords will use to the full such power of veto as has been left it. 'Ho added, rather uneandidly, that if Home'Rulo is forbed' through; an election will'come on before the Dublin. Parliament can pass" any. oppressive legislation. Hero again Mr. Balfour's " halfdoubts concerning Mb. appear to find some justification, for hardly anyone, even amongst the least thoughtful section of voters', can fail to. know that once p'assca Home _ Rule is permanent,Vand-that no British' election eould affect, or ought,to affeot,, the oondu.ot, of j-'a Dubliri Parliament. If Home Rule : comes it would be an atrocipus thing to interfesre with the granted freedom of .an Irish Parliament; 'The Lords, however, will probably pass , the Home Rule Bill, with amendments which will.fix publio opinion upon tho cssentjal pafta of the Unr ionist case, ' The latest speeches of Mr. Bonar Law and Sir Edward Carson have brought Mr. Asqtjith face to face with, the fact that;he is ' doing a, wrong to British ; elec- i torato as well as to tho best; Irish Nationalists in forcing Home Rule, j through, as part of an undisguised bargain with tho'DiiMiNparty (Mr. - 1 Redmond is only the figurehead) in ] Jefianeo of the maxim of Mn- Glad- j STONE that ruin to the Empire and i ihe Kingdom must bo tho sequel of > Home' Rule carried by' a Liberal ] aovern'ment dependent, as it ia deoendont to-day; upon Irish vote'. , Ireland requires is, not Home i Etulc'but an escape, through .a' 1 [ound system of Imperially-aided i local, government, from the upper! ind nether millstones of the British ] larty polieies. j