The Ulster Ruction.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 82, 27 March 1914, Page 5

The Ulster Ruction.

PARLIAMENT v. THE ARMY.

THE ARMY v. THE PEOPLE.

COLONEL SEELY’S EXPLANATION

“The Resignations were due to a Complete and Honest Misapprehension.’’

[By Electric Telegraph—Copyright]

[United Press Association, i London, March 25

In the House, Colonel Seely emphasised that the suggestion that the King had taken any initiative in this matter was absolutely without foundaion in the broadest sense. His Majesty took no initiative of any kind. Colonel Seely repeated this, amidst loud Opposition cheers.Colonel Seely, continuing, said it had appeared to the Government and General Paget that the movement to protect the depots might result in civil commotion, and they therefore took stops to support the troops, but were anxious to avoid any provocative action. The resignations were due to a complete and honest misapprehension. General Paget had made a statement that the, officers believed there was a plan to overwhelm Ulster by surprise attacks. He said that during his interview with the officers, he asked General Gough how the difficulty had arisen. General Gough replied: “Because we thought we were going to be asked to coerce Ulster, and this seemed to get outside lawful orders.”

Colonel Seely continued : “I said the Government must retain the right to use the forces of the Crown, hut it is proper to tell you clearly that the Government has no intention of taking advantage of the right to protect civil power in order to crush political opposition.” General Gough then said: “You had better put this clefir statement in writing,” to which Coloney Seely assented. The Adju-tant-General prepared a draft of the first three clauses. Cabinet discussed the document, and Colonel Seely’s conversation with the officers. During the Cabinet meeting Colonel Seely went to Buckingham Palace and returned as the Cabinet was breaking up. .'. - > Colonel Seely concluded by saying he did not know that Cabinet iiad seriously considered the document and regarded it as final. MR BALFOUR. Mr Balfour pointed out that Colonel Seely still adhered to his two paragraphs. It must be presumed that the Government agreed, as Colonel Seely remained in the Cabinet. Certainly the paragraphs represented facts. Colonel Seely had told the country the truth in words which were unmistakable, nvords which the whole Army would take as a charter. It was now hopeless to force disruptive legislation at the point of the bayonet.

PREMIER ASQUITH

SEELY’S RESIGNATION NOT

ACCEPTED.

Mr Asquith regretted the most unfair, inconsiderate and improper attempt to bring the King’s name into political events. From first to last His Majesty had observed in, every way the position of a constitutional monarch. He was'not going to accept Colonel Seely’s resignation because that would be ungenerous and unjust, when the error was committed at a time of great stress and anxiety. MR RAMSAY MACDONALD, Mr Ramsay MacDonald said that if the position revealed by the White Paper had been the Government’s position, it could not have lived for twenty-four hours. He was delighted that it was not the Government’s position. Sir Edward Grey had said that when the Cabinet authorised itscommunications to General Gough, the latter’s letter' of the 23rd was not before them. The paragraphs that Colonel Seely added were harmless in themselves, but Cabinet was unable to endorse them, because they appeared as aji answer to General Gough. The Government still maintained that General Gough returned unconditionally. The 1 Government stood by the first portion of the communication, and was responsible for nothing else. .

The Government never contemplated

force to coerce Ulster,

but was prepared to use force to any extent to make the will of the country prevail- That contingency, however, would not arrive for a long time. He looked with the greatest loathing and reluctance upon any prospect of coercion, and still hoped it would be avoided. But the ono road to a certain revolution was for the Government to allow its policy to be dictated or influenced by the officers’ politics. IN THE LORDS. Lord Morley, in the House of Lords, repeated Colonel Seely’s explanation. He incidentally admitted that he was cognisant of the complete document, which Colonel Seely showed him to enable him (Lord Morley) to answer questions. MR CHAMBERLAIN. Mr Chamberlain repudiated the suggestion that it was intended to use the Army for party purposes. Ho said the country now knew that Lord

Morley had assisted in drafting the paragraphs and documents given to General Gough. If the pledge that Colonel Seely and Lord Morley gave was repudiated, as men of honor they could not stay in the Cabinet any longer. ■) OPPOSITION PROTESTS. I Mr. Churchill, in closing the debate, said, on Lord Morley’s responsibility, that he neither reVised nor examined the additional paragraphs. He declared the two great issues that emerged from the proceeding were: Parliament versus the Army; and the Army versus the people. The Opposition, he said, laid down the principle that it was always right for a soldier to shoot a Radical or a Laborite. (Shouts of pVotest, the Opposition crying “Liar”! NEWSPAPER COMMENT, The Chronicle states: Colonel Seely cut an inglorious figure. But he is a fine type of an English gentleman. The manliness and condone of his apologies aroused universal sympathy. The Daily Mail states that when ‘Cabinet on Tuesday heard that FieldMarshal Sir J. French had signed General Gough’s guarantee, Mr Lloyd-George threatened to resign unless Colonel Seely did. The latter tendered his resignation, but it became evident on Wednesday thav Colonel Seely’s actions involve Mr' Churchill and Lord Morley, and, as Mr Asquith stood sturdily (by Colonel Seely, Mr Lloyd-George withdrew his opposition.

THE BAD MORAL EFFECT.

L.i-dor.. March 25i

Mr J. Ward, Labor M P., speaking .it Stoke-on-Trent, prophesied that in the next turbulent strike soldiers, following the precedent of Gie officers, would decline to suppress riots.

THE IMPORTATION OF ARMS.

London, March 26

A special jury at the Belfast Assizes awarded £IOO to the son of a gunsmith, as damages from the Customs authorities. for seizure of goods mider the proclamation prohibiting the importation of arms. The judge restricted the hearing to the facts, and left the legal question to the higher Court.

SIR EDWARD CARSON.

London, March 26

Sir Edward Carson, interviewed, said that any previous Government would have been compelled to resign after such an extraordinary muddle, but the Parliament Act and payment, of members enabled Cabinet to carry on without regard to decency. i* THE “THUNDERER” SPEAKS. The Times, in a leader, says: “Mr Asquith and his colleagues have only to sink deeper into the bog which must soon close over their heads.

MORE PRESS COMMENT. (Received 8.45 a.m.) London, March 26. Newspapers comment on the bad rule by which three members of the Army Council make a quorum, enabling a Minister of War easily to secure recognition of his decision.

NEXT WEEK’S DEBATE.

(Received 10.25 a.m.) London, March 26

Mr Lloyd George announced that the Home Rule Bill will be considered on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday.

“England expects that every Man this

day will do His Duty.”

Lord Charles Beresford asked, if the Navy is to be given a similar assurance to the Army that they will nob he employed against Ulster. Mr Churchill replied that the naval force were expected to obey without question orders given through the proper channels.

THE DOMINION RESIGNATIONS.

Dunedin, March 27

The Evening Star has good reasons for believing that the Home Rule Bill has been the cause of some resignations of Imperial officers serving in the Dominion, and instances the case of Colonel Knox, now on his way to England. “THROWN TO WOLVES.” (Received 8.0 a.m.) Times and Sydney Sun Services. London, March 26. Mr Bouar Law, in sympathising with Colonel, Seely, stated that h©

had heard of people being thrown to wolves, but never before with a bargain on the part of the wolves that they woidd not eat him. "HEROIC PATIENCE OF CATHOLICS.” (Received 8. oa.m.) New York, March 26. Cardinal O’Connell, Archbishop of Boston, said the heroic patience of Catholics in Ireland at present is a wonderful spectacle of dignity, and was really sublime in >ts import.