IRELAND.

Taranaki Daily News, 15 April 1918, Page 4

IRELAND.

THE CONVENTION'S REPORT.

SUMMARY OF MAIN POINTS. THE TWO GREAT DIFFICULTIES. ULSTER AND THE CUSTOMS. Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assoc. and Reuter. Received April 14, 5.5 p.m. London, .April 13. The report of the Irish Convention has been issued. A covering letter by the chairman, Sir H. Plunkett, to Mr. Lloyd George, summarises the main points. Sir H. Plunkett says that while it was found impossible to overcome the objections of the Ulster ''Unionists, the following parties were agreed that a scheme of self-government should be passed, ua> "ly a majority of the Nationalists, all V southern Unionists, and five out of se 1 Laborites. The minority National differed only an one particular frorr / majority, therefore the convention lid the foundation of an Irish agreement unprecedented in history. The convention explored every possibility of agreement, and after eight months, decided to issue a report which should be a mere narrative of the convention's proceedings. This report was adopted by the majority. There was no majority report in the sense of a reasoned statement in favor of the conclusions wherein the majority agreed. However, the Ulster Unionists and the minority Nationalists presented a minority report. The result was to minimise the agreement reached, and to emphasise disagreement. There were two possible issues to the deliberations. If a scheme ff self-govern-ment could be framed whereto the Ulster Unionists would give adherence, then the convention might produce a unanimous report. Failing this, it was felt the convention might secure some agreement,, either complete or substantia], between the Nationalists and southern Unionists. The Laborites, however, and a portion of Ulster claimed that if Ireland had the right to separate itself from the United Kingdom, Ulster had the right to separate from the rest of Ireland, but no other section of rtlie convention would accepteven a temporary partition; hence the Ulster Unionist members of the convention remained there only in the hope that some form of home rule would be proposed which might modify the determination of those they represented to have neither part nor lot in an Irish Parliament. The Nationalists strove to win them by concessions, but they found themselves unable to accept any of the schemes discussed, and the only scheme of Irish government they presented to the convention was confined to the exclusion of their entire province. The two great difficulties were Ulster and the Customs. The latter became a vital question.

Sir H. Plunkett states that the tendency of recent political thought among the Constitutional Nationalists has beeni towards a form of government resem-l bling as closely as possible that of the dominions, and,, since the geographical position of Ireland imposes obvious restrictions with respect to naval and military affairs, the claim for dominion homo rule was concentrated upon the demand for unrestricted fiscal powers, without separate customs and excise. Ireland would, according to this view, fail to attain a national status like the Upon this issue the Nationalists made a strong case. They proved that a considerable number of leading commercial men now favored fiscal autonomy as part of the Irish settlement. In the present state of public opinion in Ireland it was feared that without, customs no scheme that the convention recommended would receive a sufficiently popular "support to obviate any serious disturbance of the trade of the United Kingdom. They were prepared to agree to a free trade arrangement between the two countries, but this did not overcome the difficulties of the southern Unionists, who agreed with the Ulster Unionists on this point. They were apprehensive that a separate system of customs control, however guarded, might impair the authority of the United Kingdom over its external trade policy; neither could they consent to any settlement which was, in their judgment, incompatible with Ireland's full participation in the scheme of United Kingdom federation, should that come to .pass. Sir H. Plunkett proceeds to refer to a series of resolutions passed regarding the self-government scheme, which provides for the establishment of a Parliament for the whole of Ireland, with a responsible executive, and full powers over all internal legislation, 'administration and direct taxation. ' Pending a decision on the fiscal question, it provides that the imposition of customs and excise duties shall remain with the Imperial Parliament, but the whole proceeds of these duties shall be paid into the Irish Exchequer, a board to be appointed to determine the true Irish revenue, and Ireland to be "represented on the. Board of Customs and Excise of the United Kingdom. The principle of representation in the Imperial Parliament was insisted upon by the southern Unionists and the Nationalists conceded it. It was felt, however, that there were strong reasons for providing that the Irish representatives at Westminster should be elected by the Irish Parliament, rather than directly by the constituencies. This was adopted. It was accepted in principle that Ireland should contribute to the cost of the Imperial services, but owing to lack of data it was impossible to fix any definite sum.

It was agreed that the Irish Parliament should consist of a Senate of 64 members and a House of Commons of 200, the principle underlying the composition of the Senate being its representation of the interests of commerce, industry, labor, county councils, churches, learned institutions and the peerage. The Nationalists offered to guarantee 40 per cent, of the membership of the House of Commons to the Unionists. It "was agreed that, in the south, adequate representation could only be secured by nomination, but, as the Ulster representatives informed the convention, those for whom they spoke could not accept the principle of nomination. Provision was made in the scheme for the extra representation of Ulster by direct, election. The majority of the Laborites frankly object t>» the principle of nomination, and to what they regard as the inadequate representation of Labor in the Senate.

Sir H. Plunkett, in conclusion, points out that the convention had to find a way of the most complex and anomalous political situation in history. We are living under a system' of government which survives only because an Act abolishing it cannot, consistently with Ministerial pledges, be put into operation ' without legislation, no less difficult and controversial than that which it has to

amend in attempting to find a comprb* misc which Ireland might accept and Parliament pass into law. It has been recognised that the full programme of 110 party could be adopted, (The convention was also bound to give due weight to the opinion that to press for a settlement at Westminster during the war would imperil the prospect of the early establishment of self-government. , Notwithstanding the difficulties wherewith the matter was surrounded, a larger measure of agreement was reached upon the principles and details of Irish selfgovernment than has ever ye't" been attained.

HOSTILITY OF ULSTER UNIONISTS Received April 14, 5.15 p.m. London, April 13. The Ulster Unionist delegates have attacked the report, wherein they state they were unable to concur with the chairman's report, and they protest against the implication that a measure of agreement was attained, which was not borne out by the evidence. Provisional conclusions on minor matters were strictly contingent on an agreement on vital issues. These were fundamental, and no agreement was at any time visible at the convention. Nationalist demands denied the Imperial Parliament's right to impose military service in Irer#nd, whilst an important Nationalist section favored a contribution to this year's Imperial needs, of about one-third what they should contribute. There is no reason why Ireland, in the hour of the Empire's need,'should not contribute her full share of men and money. Failing any approach to the narrowing down of our differences, and in view of the Nationalists' new demands, we are finally forced to declare that Ulster could not participate in such a scheme of self-government. Our opinion is strengthened that home rule can only intensify the existing divisions in Ireland, and prove a constant menace to the Empire, besides making future federalism impossible.

PROTEST AGAINST CONSCRIPTION.

NATIONALIST GIVES WAY TO-SINN FEINER. Reuter Service. Received April 13, 5.5 p.m.

London, April 12. The Nationalist, Mr. 'Dooley, at the request of his supporters, has decided as a protest against conscription not to contest the North, King's County seat against the Sinn Feiner. The polling has been fixed for the 25th.