SINN FEIN’S REPLY.

Taranaki Daily News, 27 August 1921, Page 5

SINN FEIN’S REPLY.

RECEIVED IN LONDON. NO DETAILS REVEALED. A HOPEFUL FEELING, By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright London, August 25. The reply of the Dail Eireann has been delivered in Downing Street. It is understood that the answer in no way means the breaking off of negotiations. It is expected that Cabinet will meet in the. evening to consider the reply. It is understood there will lie no publication until both sides agree to the documents being made public.— Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.

CABINET DISCUSSES REPLY.

PROBLEM STILL FORMIDABLE. NEGOTIATIONS CAN CONTINUE. REPUBLIC DEMAND DROPPED. Received August 26, 9.15 p.m. London, August 26. Cabinet last night discussed the Dail Eireann’s reply for two hours, but decided that it would not issue a statement. The Daily Telegraph understands that while the difficulties of the situation remain as formidable as ever, Sinn Fein has left an avenue for the continuation of negotiations. Cabinet’s reply will be finalised to-day, and will reach De Valera tomorrow.

The Daily Express says De Valera’s reply raises a clear-cut issue of the essential unity of Ireland, and seeks to throw upon the Government the responsibility of bringing Ulster into an allIreland scheme. •

The Daily Chronicle states the Dail Eireann’s reply avoids reference to the republican demand, and instead reviews Irish history and insists upon the right of Ireland to chose its own form of Government for the whole country. Finally, it expresses reluctance to resume the old state of warfare. The Sinn Fein organ, the Iri°h Bulletin, declares the Government of Ireland has definitely rejected the British proposals.

VALUE OF DISCUSSIONS. I I ATTITUDE OF IRISH PEOPLE. NEED FOR UNDERSTANDING. Received August 26, 10.5 p.m. \ London, August 26. Sir Horace Plunkett, one of the leading Irishmen of the day, interviewed by the Daily News, said: “I have felt increasingly. during the past two months., that the fullest and frankest discussion has been infinitely more helpful than this strange reversion to secret, diplomacy. The neer} for discussion has been emphasised by the. publication of General Smuts’ tetter prior to the disclosure of the Government’s offer. It is ; doubtless a master stroke of propag- ! nnda and was bound to influence world opinion. If De Valera rejects the offer altogether it does not need the gift of prophecy to predict that there will be a demand from influential quarters for an immediate renewal of hostilities.

‘‘The Irish say truly that there are discrepancies between the actual offer and General Smuts’ interpretation thereof. I believe General Smuts would admit the force of the Irish objections and suggest ways of meeting them, but while, to the leaders of the Irish people, these differences make all the difference befcwen reasonable concession and blank refusal, they mean nothing to 99 per cent, of the British people. What is vitally and urgently necessary outs de of Ireland is a general understanding of the main issuer., the status and the unity of Ireland, and their interdependence. Unity is still prejudiced in the offer by the Act. of 1920, which fourfifths of the people resent as being dictated by the Ulster Unionist Council, the Ulster people themselves not being consulted.

“.The Government has ’unquestionably made a great concession in half of its policy, but in the other half it remains rigid at. the dictation of a small minority. If the Dail Eireann should be also unyielding, it would be criminal to resort to hostilities until there had been a thorough public discussion, in which the Ulster minority should he called upon to participate.”—Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.