The Stratford Evening Post WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 1914. HOME RULE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXIX, Issue 1, 22 April 1914, Page 4

The Stratford Evening Post WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE EGMONT SETTLER. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 1914. HOME RULE.

We have hoard so much against Home Rule from the point of view of the denomination in Ireland which has shown, ith'olf to be strongly (ppos ■ l

to the proposal that it is a rather interesting change to consider a plea for Home Rule from the Protestant standpoint, says the "Otago Daily Times" and continues: Such a plea is advanced by Lieutenant-Colonel Seton Churchill in the latest issue of the "Fortnightly Review." In a temperately and well-argued article the writer recalls the fact that until about 112 years ago the Protestants of Ulster 'iwere governed from Dublin, and he contends that, so far from their having any "elementary right" to be governed from Westminster, it is all the other way, the only right they can claim, being to bo governed from Dublin by their own countrymen. The Parliament which sat at Dublin was composed of Protestants, but before tho transfer to Westminster took place the franchise was extended to Roman Catholics. Apparently the Protestants dit! not at that time entertain the fears they have since developed. I Lieutenant-Colonel Churchill also makes the point that the Protestants in 1801 strongly opposed tho transfer! of the seat of Government from Dublin to Westminster, and the question is raised whether they were not really better judges than the Protestants | in 1911. Lieutenant-Colonel Churchill has no doubt whatever that in refusing to favor tho Union the Orangemen of over a hundred years ago were more farsightod "than their descendants, whom, however, he regards as the dupes of clever politicians, lie proceeds to controvert the idea that Hume Ride would lie tantamount to what is known as "Rome Ride." This phase of the situation has been frequently enough discussed, but the writer in this instance introduces an interesting argument when, arguing in favor ef the granting ef Home Rula is an net ef justice, ha says: "But ttlioii a small minority of one-fifth of the na-

tion come forward and claim that on the ground of religion it is impossible for ns to carry out this act of justice, because they fear possible persecution from Roman Catholics, we may fairly point out to them that this is nor the view that their Protestant ancestors took a century They lived in a more intolerant age, and they knew quite as much about the possibilities of the situation as their descendant*. But they also knew that they were quite capable of defending themselves if any real persecution did arise. The modern Protestant lias been led into a false position by his political allies, and consequently is not playing a very heroic part by crying out so much before he is hurt. Moreover, while doing this, lie does not exhibit any statesmanlike anticipation of the future by attempting in any way to safeguard the interests of Protestantism supposing the possibility of a revival of religious intolerance. . . Reasonable safeguards are one tiling, but blue funk is another, and it is to be greatly feared that this latter is causing such a panic that the reasonable safeguards for the future are being entirely neglected."