The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1912. HOME RULE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 163, 27 November 1912, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 1912. HOME RULE.

The lurid pictures which have boon drawn by Sir Edward Carson as to what is going to happen when Ireland is (intrusted with the management of her own internal affairs need not cause a great deal of anxiety. A little lcailet which has just been issued by the Home Rule Council ir London shows that the, self:appointed leader of the Ulster "loyalists" was just as violently opposed to the conciliatory proposals of the Conservative Government 14 years ago as he is to the conciliatory proposals of the Libearl Government to-day. In 1898 the Irish Local Government 1301 was before the House of Commons, and Sir Edward Carsou was one of the principal speakers at a great meeting of the Irish Unionist Alliance, called to condemn the "iniquitous measure." He certainly did not mince matters. "They were now engaged on the consideration of a measure only second in importance to Home Rule," the summary of his remarks published in the London Times ran, "and they considered that the proposals of Her Majesty's Government would lead to social revolution in Ireland. He could not conceive on what ground Her Majesty's Government thought they were acting with any degree of justice or fairness to those with whom those now present sympathised in Ireland when they introduced this measure, which was not only democratic, but more democratic than anything in England or Scotland. The fact was that the Unionists of Ireland had been betrayed by their Unionist Government." Sir Edward, it is well to remember, was speaking of a measure introduced by his political friends, and was restrained by his desire to prevent his personal prejudices conflicting with his party leanings, a •tate of mind to which we are not foreign even among Taranaki politicians. It is not difficult to imagine what his language would have been if the Hill had come from the other side of the House. As it was, he played the part of a candid friend with in ingenuousness that was absolutely refreshing. "He was told," the summary of his remarks continued, "that the Unionists of Ireland ought to be proud to know that they'had in the House of Commons a majority of 140. What had the majority done? They had done absolutely nothing so far as legislation was concerned. He had been in

the House of Commons ior many years, and lie would honestly say that during the three years the Government of all the talents had been in power, he had never heard towards the Unionists of Ireland one word of sympathy from Her Majesty's Government. Was this state of things to be allowed to exist? With shame they had to confess that, so far as legislation was concerned, there had been nothing to choose between the two political parties in the country." Really, when allowance is made for the difference in' his relations with the two Go- * vernments, Sir Edward Carson appears to be wonderfully moderate in his recent utterances. He accused the Conservative Government of 1898 of betraying the Irish -Unionists, and predicted that its apostasy would bring about a social revolution; and now he is accusing the Liberal Government of doing exactly the same thing, and predicting the same disastrous upheaval. But the passage .of the Local Government Bill brought nothing but good to the people of Ireland and to the nation, and there is no reason to assume that the passage of the Home Rule Bill would not be equally beneficent. But apparently. Sir Edward Carson, who is once again the head of the Opposition, will have neither the Conservative nor the Liberal Government. Perhaps a Government consisting entirely of Sir Edward Carson would meet his views better, although we have 1 our' doubts iliat even his characteristic temperament would overweigh his convictions, and diat ho would at onee proceed to turn himself out of office simply as a matter of principle.