HOME RULE BILL

Hokitika Guardian, 25 November 1920, Page 1

HOME RULE BILL

(AUBIEAHAN & N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION] LONDON, Nov. 2,4. In the House of Lords the Government’s Bill for a change in Irish Govern ment, was debated. It provides for separate Parliaments, without fiscal eu-\ tonomy, for either Ulster or the rest of 'lreland. The debate attracted a distinguished gathering of peers. IVffiny crosscurrents* of opinion both between Unionists and Liberals were exhibited in the discussion.

The Lord Chancellor, Lord Birkenhead (formerly Sir f. E l . Smith), moved the reading of the Bill, ff© fif s f read a letter from Sir Edward Carson to himself, stating that Ulster would fully accept this’Bill,‘as being'the'best' and the only solution of Ireland’s difficulties. Ulster,’he said; preferred union.;’ but wanted peace and freedom for party politics. Ulster wanted the suppression of the Home Rule Act, of 1914, now.on the Statute Book. Lord Birkenhead said lie admitted the South of Ireland might refuse to ojgerate the Bill. In that case, the Bill itself provided that Ireland become a Crown Colony. He said the Soufh of Ireland actually might establish a Parliament uiider this Bill, and then proclaim Ireland a Republic. Lord Birkenhead declared that lie did not believe that Sinn Rein would adopt such course. But if they did, he said, the Southern Parliament of Ireland woufd then be dissolved. This would involve the possibility of a icconquest of Ireland by Britain. He declared plainly that he personally remained a fJnionist. If the Unionists could be sure of twenty years of iin- , broken power, he asserted, lie would continue to advocate the present form of Government for Ireland. But he added that in the present political situation nobody' could be sure of the Unionists retaining power much longer. Continuing, the Lord Chancellor alluded to the recent events in Ireland and the shootings at Dublin, flc said he did not profess to flippantly predict the future, but lie hoped bis Government would yet succeed where O’Connell, Gladstone, and Parnell had failed. If they did, he declared they would make an immense contribution to the stability of the Empire. Lord Birkenhead said:—“lt would be tragic, if after our conquering a powerful enemy abroad, we should remain enfeebled at the heart of the Empire by the plague spot of sedition.” Lord Dunraven moved the rejection of the Bill. The measure', he said, uid not go far enough. Any Irish solution must depend upon the support of moderate Irish opinion. Such support > could not be' secured while Ireland was t not given full fiscal and financial c©n- . trol of Irish affairs. I Lord Willoughby de Broke said he J favoured the rejection of this Bill. H© j said any measure of Home Rule for | Ireland would be wrong. "It would play into 'the hands of a gang of ruffians.”

Lord Abercorn said he supported the Bill. He hoped the time would*como when Ulster’s exaniple would pave the way tq a United Irish Parliament. Lord Haldane said the Bill was at least a sfep in the right direction. Ife thought .nobody should interfere with the Government’s efforts to effect a settlement. ’ 'Lord Clanwiilliam said the Irish were the one people who were unable to govern themselves. He asserted there was a ’ foreign conspiracy afoot to destroy the British Empire. It woufd use Ireland as a. jumping off ground. The debate was adjourned.

TEe Government newspapers point out the Chancellor did not shirk the phrase Crown Colony, as Ministers avoided it in the Hoiise of Commons, when explaining the effect of the Home Rule Bill.