THE IRISH PROBLEM.

Hokitika Guardian, 27 August 1921, Page 3

THE IRISH PROBLEM.

CABLE NEWS.

S. AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION. IRELAND'S REPLY DISCUSSED. LONDON, Aug. 26. 3- There was a Cabinet Council last n night which discussed the Dail Eire bann’s reply for two hours, o It was decided however, that the n Cabinet would not issue any states’ meat. d NEWSPAPER VERSIONS. »• LONDON, Aug. 26 s The Daily Telegraph says it iindcr- '■ stands that, while the difficulties of the d .dilation remain as formidable as ever, 8 Sinn Fein has left an evenue for a cone tinuation of negotiations. e It adds that i''e British Cabinet’s reply will lie finalised to-day, and will " reach Mr De Valera to-morrow. 1 The “London Daily Express” says: ■ “De Valera’s reply raises the clear cut 3 issue of the essential unity of Ireland, " and seeks to throw upon the 'Government the responsibility of bringing Ulster into an All Ireland scheme. The “Daily Chronicle” states: —“Dail Eireann’s reply avoids reference to the republican demand, and instead reviews Irish history to choose upon the right of Ireland to choose her own lorm ol Government forthe whole country. Finally it expresses a reluetaivo to resume the old state of war fare. SINN FEINS STATEMENT. LONDON. Aug. 26. The. Sinn Fein organ "The Irish Bulletin” declares that the Government of ].reland have definitely rejected the British proposals. HORACE PLUNKETT’S VIEWS. LONDON, Aug. 26. Sir Horace Plunkett (President of the last Irish Convention) interviewed by the "Daily News” said: "1 have telt increasingly during the past two months that the fullest and frankest-discussion would have been infinitely more helpful than this strange reversion to secret diplomacy. The need for discussion lias been emphasised by the publication of General Smuts’ letter prior to the disclosure of the terms of the Government’s, offer. ft was doubtless a master stroke of) propaganda, and was hound to influence world opinion. It De Valera rejects the offer, which a former enemy general blesses altogether, it does not need the gift of prophecy to predict that there will be a demand from influential quarters for an immediate renewal of hostilities. The Irish say truly that there are discrepancies between the actual offer and General Smuts's interpretation thereof. I believe General Smuts would admit the force of the Irish objections, and that lie would suggest, ways of meeting them : hut while, to tho leaders of tin 1 majority of the Irish people those differences make all the difference between a reasonable concession and a blank refusal, they mean nothing to !>!) per cent of the British people. What is vitally and urgently necessary

outside of Ireland, is a general under standing of the main issues, namely th< status and unite of Ireland and then inl'M'-dopimd< "re. Coiii i- til! pro in lined in the Hiitidi offer by the Irisl Gi vernmeiit Act of l!)2(K which four fifths of the people resent as living dictated by the Ulster Unionist Council. The Ulster people themselves are not being consulted. The British lms unquestionably made a great concession in half its policy, hut in the other half if lemains rigid and that at the dictation of a small minority. If the Dail Eireann he ailso unyielding, it would be criminal to resort to hostilities until there bad been a thorough public discussion, in which the Ulster minority should be called upon to participate.