THE IRISH PROBLEM.

Hokitika Guardian, 14 December 1921, Page 2

THE IRISH PROBLEM.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION. PE VALERA ANSWERS CRITICS LONDON, Dec. 13. Mr De Valera has issued a state- / merit in which he says: “I have been asked whether the honour of Ireland is not involved in the ratification of the 'proposed terms. The honour of Ireland is not involved. The Insh plenipotentiaries were sent to London on a distinct understanding. It was that any agreement there made was to Lo subject to the country’s riitificatuF* . Rind that it could be rejected by ibo Dail Eireann, or .by the country, if it did not commend itself thereto. The British Parliament and people will, on their side similarly consider this agreement, and will do so solely on its merits. If they desire so to do, then the British Parliament and people can reject it. The ratification of this agreement is not mere formality. The United States, indeed, has refused to ratify , the Treaty that was signed ny President Wilson aV Versailles. The honour of thd Irish nation is not involved in the accepting or rejecting of these ' terms, unless, and until, the Treaty is • ratified. j THE BRITISH FLAG. 1 UNITED SERVICE TELEGRAMS. | LONDON, Dec. 12. The “Daily Mail” asks:—ls the Union Jack and the incorporation of dominion and other flags doomed as a result of the creation of an Irish Free State:- This question the College of Health is considering. The paper points out that the removal of the Cross of , St Patrick after 120 years will transform the appearanec of the flag. It will ; certainly become the.flag under which great victories were won in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but to most minds the sentimental loss will he great. Probably it will be found that i the deletion is not absolutely necessary, j Other possible changes include the abolition of the title of the United | Kingdom, the removal of tile harp from the Royal Standard and the Coat ! of Arms, and tiie substitution of Ulster ' emblems.

AFRAID OF FINANCE. LONDON, Dec 12. Sir James Craig addressing Ulster Parliament said he had never previously been contented with such a complicated situation as the signatures to the treaty between Britain and Sinn Fein had created. “We were not included therein,” he said, “we were not Invited to sign it. Without going into details, I must confess that the Treaty has not carried out Mr Lloyd George’s solemn pledges that Ulster’s rights would be ' prejudiced or sacrificed.” He advised the members, however, strongly they ! felt on the subject, not to act in any | unconstitutional manner but to leave 1 their interests in the hands of their reI presentatives in the Imperial Parliament. They felt anxious principally on two points,' those of finance and the I boundary commission. Sir J. Craig j said he 'hoped the Ulster people would maintain a dignified attitude, A’ith calm i courage and hopeful optimism, trusting to their leaders. Ulster was determined to stand 1 by her ideals, and would j not swerve an inch therefrom. They were only anxious to remain part and ! parcel of the British Empire.

LORD ROBERT CECIL’S VIEWS. LONDON, Dec 12Lord Robert Cecil, speaking at Hitchin, at the Conservative Club, referpwy*

to the Irish Treaty. It was a very far-reaching departure he said, and it seemed almost an abolition of the union of Britain and Ireland. However, he had personally come to the conclusion that this new Irish policy was an inevitable one. It was a thousand pities, said Lord Cecil, that these concessions were not made until after a period of crime, as they have now exposed the British Govdrnment to the charge that they granted to violence what they had refused to reason. It was a dangerous precedent. Nevertheless he was prepared to support the proposed settlement.

There would be a better ilianee of success, he said, if Ulster gave a helping hand. lAird Cecil added: “Our old Unionism lias gone old. The parties seem unreal. We want a new inspiration in polities.”