BRITISH POLITICS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 956, 18 February 1911, Page 3

BRITISH POLITICS.

HOME RUEE DEBATE. [,onj)ON, Feb. 15. Mr lan Malcolm, Unionist member for Croydon, movvd an amendment to the Address-in-Replv in the House of Commons yesterday, to the effect that the proposal to grant Home Rule was subversive of the United Kingdom and of the well-being of all its parts.

In his speech, the mover criticised the various views of the members of the Cabinet on the question. Lord Hugh Cecil (Unionist) seconded the amendment, and said many Liberals were not favourable to the Home Rule Mr Redmond wanted, unless the Imperial supremacy over the Irish Parliament meant interference with decisions about which the Irish people held strong convictions. It was a matter mainly of words. Ireland by representation in the House of Commons had selfgovernment, therefore the analogy with the colonies was destroyed. Home Rule was a retrograde movement.

Mr Asquith, the Prime Minister, said there was nothing obscured or ambiguous about his declarations on Home Rule from the beginning. He instanced his 1893 speech on Mr Gladstone’s Bill. He had never regarded Home Rule as an exceptional and desperate remedy for a desperate and exceptional disease. The case of Ireland was one of paramount and undeniable urgency. He quoted his 1901 speech in favour of granting devolutiouary local powers. The problem would only be solved by granting selfgovernment in purely Irish affairs, while safeguarding the supremacy of the Imperial Parliament. There could be no question of separation with these conditions. That was the Liberal policy. By his declaration in December, xqoS, every voter in January, 1910, voted with the full knowledge that if the Government succeeded in its first task of abolishing the Lords’ veto Home Rule would follow. (Ministerial and Nationalist cheers).

Continuing, Mr Asquith agreed that Scotland and Wales suffered similarly, but Ireland’s need was paramount. A similar policy had been applied throughout the Empire and lately in South Africa. Why, then, should not the same remedy be successful in Ireland ? He believed it was strictly on the lines of Imperial development, and that was true Imperialism. Mr John Redmond, the Irish leader, said the people of Ireland regarded Mr Asquith’s declaration as obscure. They accepted his definition of Home Rule, which they honestly believed would prove to be the final settlement. Mr Redmond continued: “We admit and accept the Imperial supremacy which ought to put clown any oppression of Protestants. As pacified South Africa was the greatest glory of Edward's reign, so George’s rule will be made still more glorious by friendly and reconciled Ireland. Mr W. H. Long (Unionst) said it was not the first time Mr Redmond had promised the minority fair play, but the experience under the Local Government Act had not justified the trust. It South Africa was an example of Home Rule, then Ireland, as a separate country and Government furnished sufficient details to justify a determined opposition. Mr Winston Churchill, Home Secretary, said the events following the selfgovernment of the Transvaal were the principle cause of the change in English opinion in favour of Home Rule. He admitted the formidable difficulties, but if freed from prejudice and rancour the settlement of details need not baffle honest-hearted men. The old perils which prevented English Ministers in the past from granting Home Rule had disappeared. The economic and financial dependence of Ireland upon England was so interwoven that divergence was a moral and fiscal impossibility. Mr William O’Brien, leader of the Irish Independents, said he could do nothing to prejudice the verdict. He would be content to record his inability to share the belief that following the Government blindly would make Home Rule a certainty in the Present Parliament. He questioned its power to win by present methods. He suggested that Mr Redmond should make the Liberals and Conservatives join together to arrange a compromise on the Veto and a reconciliation for Ireland. Sir lid ward Carson, Unionist Member for Dublin University, taunted the Ministers with an absence of any allusion to Home Rule in their election addresses, and their slim way of sneaking the measure through the Commons.

Mr Augustine Birrell, Secretary for Ireland, said the Commons had given the Liberals any amount of time on the Irish question, yet it would take the new Dublin Parliament five years to cope with arrears.

The amendment was rejected, the voting being : Against the amendment 326 For the amendment ... 213 Home Rule Majority. ... 113