IRISH QUESTION

Hokitika Guardian, 23 May 1932, Page 5

IRISH QUESTION

BRITISH POSITION

J. H. THOMAS AND DE VALERA.

[United Press Association—By Electri*

I olegra pli.—Copy/ igtit.)

LONDON, May 21

The Free State announces that its acceptance, of the Ottawa invitation .vti, I holds good. The Government will be prepared to emnnumee discus.'ion with the other int.rested Govcr'muLuts when its conference* preparations' au ;,uiiicien-ly advanced.

,Speak.ng at Brighton during Empire Shopping Week, Mr •). 11. Thomas (Dominion Secretary) re Erring to the Free State, said he did not want to speak controversially l , but it was essential to make the British position clear. The hope and belief that the Lrish Treaty would open a new era after a long period of bitterness had been justified, and the last decade had witnessed a marked improvement in AngloJLnsh political relations, with growing friendship and understanding. The Free State had become, an equal member of the British Commonwealth, and its representatives had been in the forefront of constitutional development, resulting in the establishment of a group of nations on a footing of complete equality. “If ah’, that work is wasted it will not bo our fault or wish,’’ added Mr Thomas. “I stand by every word of my recent utterances regarding our relations with the Free State, wherein I based our position -simply on the sanctity of treaties and the maintenance of agreements.

“How could we negotiate fresh agreements with tho Free State if existing ones are not observed? Could wc suppose that greater sanctity would be attached to a treaty made at Ottawa than at London?

A NEWSPAPER’S CHALLENGE

BERLIN, Alav 20

Declaring that the Ottawa Conference was primarily a trade affair transcending political considerations, Air de Valera’s newspaper in a leader challenges Brtnin to accept Mr Thomas’s attitude. The newspaper says that Britain cannot afford to ignore Ireland’s annual £50,000,000 in purchases. Those wanting to debar the Free State from attendance at the* Conference will be disappointed. Aloreover, the Conference would fail if economic considerations were subordinated to political pra judices.

AIR DE VALERA’S DEFENCE

. REPLY TO MR THOMAS

LONDON, May 22

Mr do Valera, replying •to Mr Thomas, asks:—“Why, when lie refused to the sanctity of treaties and agreements did Mr Thomas omit to mention those l embroidered reports of the Imperial Conference of 1926 and 1939, defining the mutual relations between the states of. the British Commonwealth ?” Mr de Valera added “Surely Britain does not claim the right to dictate to the Irish people, or to forbid them to adopt the measures they deem wise and necessary for their own internal peace. In what conceivable way can the removal of the oath, which is to enable a- normal method of Government, and to rep'aco coercion, injure Britain? Why should our right to pass it be questioned or denied ?” Mr de Valera is also rli.spat dim ; a reply to Britain legarding tlm lan I annuities.