HOME RULE BILL.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1661, 30 January 1913, Page 5

HOME RULE BILL.

HOUSE OF LORDS DEBATE. FINANCES ATTACKED. A SEARCHING CRITICISM. By Telegraph—Press Association-Copyright ~-' London, January 28. - In. the debate in the House of Lords on the Home Rulo Bill, Earl Grey, formerly Governor-General of Canada, said that as a convinced Federalist ho strongly opposed the Bill. He preferred that Ulstermen in the north-east of Ireland should be given'self-government similar to Ontario, and the Nationalists in the west and south tho same rights of separate self-government as the men of Quobee. It was imperative in the Empire's interests that the question should be settled on these lines, which wore satisfying to democracies, the self-governing colonies, and the United States.

The Earl of Dunraven said the Bill was incompatible with federation, and would not; impose an adequate check", to the Order of Hibernians.

Lord St. Aldwyn (Unionist) declared that the Bill did not place the Irish Government in a position of self-reliance. Thc ( Irish expenditure was certain to. rise, whilo the revenue would diminish. No one in Ireland approved of the financial provisions, and it would be utterly impossible to .fulfil the roseate Nationalist expectations which the advent of Home Rule had aroused. It would be impossible to raise extra taxation, because the fact that Ireland was already over-taxed had been dinned into every Irishman's'ears; consequently fresh discontent would arise. Ireland would lose the advantage of the Imperial credit, and would pay a higher rate for her loans than hitherto. The real-reason for the retention of fortytwo Irish members at Westminster.' was they would act in concert in raiding the British Treasury. Their support would be open at prices corresponding to the .British Government's needs. There was'a temptation to the Irish Government not to effect economies lest that would bring nearer a financial revision, when Ireland would be asked to contribute to the Imperial expenditure. The Bill had been framed not to work, but to 'pass.

Lord Haldo.no, Lord Chancellor, was as sanguine of beneficial results from the Bill as Lord St. Aldwyn had been pessimistic and gloomy. He declared that Lord Grey's Canadian analogy could not be applied to Ireland. The theory of the Bill was true devolution, as distinct from true federation'. It was necessary to retain represen■tatidn at Westminster to give reality to the claim of an Imperial Parliament.