HOME RULE DEBATE.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 462, 4 May 1912, Page 5

HOME RULE DEBATE.

MR BALFOUR'S CRITICISM

■ ! liv I'rcr"- Av-ia 1 )<>n. CojiyriirlH ! Received May '.t.liO p.m. i London, Friday, i Mr Balfour said the restrictions in J the Home Rule Bill, Humph necessary, [ did not. give Irishmen an opportunity of developing affairs on their own lines. Dual control was written large J throughout. the measure neither protecting the majority nor giving Irishmen the advantage:'- now derived in I connect ion with the United Kingdom, j The Bil! would prevent public spirited I men from entering the Irish t'arilaj me.nt and the result would he the rej turn of inferiors and a lowering of the | Assembly's status. The proposal to j temporaily stengthen the representa- • 1 ion from West minster during the adjustment, of finances was amazing. He ehniiengoii (lie Minister to cite a case where ■) unified Cvernment has | been broken up to meet, the demand of ! self-government,, wherein a stable j community resulted. Was there any ■ precedent for starting a federation on the basis of inequality or where the i j claims of a homogeneous fraction i were ignored? Was not tho federal I idea the creation of general services, i the abolition of fiscal divisions, and j the desire for closer unity. The Coi vernment had not; heeded these ques- ! tions, but preferred to cut up the kingdom while the Nationalists probably regarded partial independence as the precursor to a completed independence. EARL GREY REPLIES. A CONGESTED COMMONS. Received May 3, 9.30 p.m. London, Friday. Earl Grey dealt with the advantage of relieving the congestion of the House of Commons. To reply to Mr Balfour's questions lie said would require prolonged historical research, and he was unprepared to answer. Mr Balfour had said the Transvaal was not a parallel. The Transvaal had not been mentioned as a parallel, but to show that a prophet of evil waß not always right he asked Mr Balfour was there a parallel to the monstrous over-concentration of the business of the House of Commons. If the present system proved unworkable, devolution was required, not in Iceland alone. He admitted tho present plan was not a pattern for a federal system to be universally applied to the Kingdom. He did not, believe perfect similarity was necessary for tha. Bill to give fnndity to an important set that .Nationalists accepted as a fulfilment, of Home Rule. If Ulster prevented this solution some other means must be found to fret< the Commons and put the c.-ntrol of Irish affairs into Irish hands. He believed the present animosity would disappear when joint responsibility was established.