THE 'STANDARD' ON ENGLISH HOME RULE.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume I, Issue 10, 5 July 1873, Page 10

THE 'STANDARD' ON ENGLISH HOME RULE.

£5. 1 Tt V fi (th ° ? uhl } a Freeman ' remarks) is indignant with the Irish and Scotch members for supporting MrOeborne Morgan's Burial S iMrt 8 ,t, th ° e £ Ußion on fche lef *-l"»nd side of thl column on SS 1 } a TI RRe*u c*e * We c 1 ™ the article ia full i a »<* °° the rightiShm doofth « «J«*™> we reprint it, substituting Irish names and W.T? -*"* I th ° Se adduc -?, a by the ' Stand^d.' The < Freeman ' hopes that xts contemporary w,U admit that this v a legitimate « argu- *» tS^ 16 ?? me ?, t0 the ? ish the P° wer of squiring. And it hopes tlie^ Standard' will soon become the advocate o( " lionie Rule

THE ' STANDARD ' OK ENOMBH HOME BPIiB.

" An English M.P." draws attention to a peculiar feature of the division on the Burials Bill. The provisions of the measure refer oxclunively to England and Wales, but the second reading was carried by the votes of Irish and Scotcli members. The, voting, so far as the Engli h and Welsh members are concerned, was exactly even, 203 voting for, and precisely the same number voting against the bill. Of the 91 Irish and Scotch members who voted on the bill, 77 supported and 14 opposed it, so that the second reading was carried by a majority of 63 Scotch and Irish votes, winch virtually held the balance of jjower against the English members. Without going the length of our correspondent, who surges rs that the time has come for establishing "a Home "Rule mov inent for England," it is impoosible to deny that there is something gravely anomalous in a representative system under , which such vexations results are porsible. The Burials Bill raises ft question of purely English interest. It is one with whioh the poople of Ireland and Scotland have no concern whatever. Yet it ii their representatives, not those of the constituencies, who practically decide the fate of the measure. The worst of it is, too, that there is no pretence for assuming that this alien vote is due to anything like a sincere consideration of the merits of the casi . The Irish and Scotch vote, it i* tolerably notorious, is at the disposal of Mr Gladstone on all -questions save jfchose in which the local interests of Ireland and Sect land aro involved. It is never withheld when the mere interests ot the Liberal party are concerned. Hence it is that the Government have been enabled to carr j all before them in regard to the introduction of the Ballot and the abolition of purchase. and this in the teeth of English opinion. What can bo more incongruous and absurd than the conduct of Dr. Cullen's Parliamentary representatives in voting for a measure which throws open the consecrated graveyards of the Kngiirih Church for the celebration of the burial rite 6of all the eocts ? Such a derrand preferred to the Roman Catholic Churoh in the uanio of the Protestant communions would be rejected with insolent contempt. The intoleranoe v, iih -which the Papacy refubss even decent burial, apart from religious rites, to those whom it deems heretics, it one of tha scuurials of the age.

THB ' STAtfDABD 1 Off IBISH HOME KUKE.

"An Irishman " draws attention to a peculiar feature of the division on the Irish Education Bill. The provisions of the measure refer exclusively to Ireland, but the second reading was sought to be carried by the votes of English and Scotcli members. The voting, so far as the Irish members are concerned, was against the proposed measure, in the proportion of five to one, only thirteen voting for and sixty voting against the bill. Of the four hundred and ninety-eight English and Scotch members who voted on the bill, two hundred and seventy one supported and two hundred and twenty -seven opposed it. The second reading would thus have been carried by a majority of forty-four English and Scotch votes, which virtually attempted to hold the balance of power against the Irish members, and very nearly succeeded. We go the full length of our correspondent, who suggests that the time has come for establishing " a Home Rule movement for Irelaud." It ia impossible to deny that there ia something gravely anomalous in a representative system under which such vexatious results are possible. The Irish Education Bill raises a question of purely Irish interest. It is one with which the people of Englaud and .Scotland ha*-e no concern whatever. Yet it is thrir representatives, not those of the English const iiuencios, who practically claim to decide the fate of the measure. The worst of it is, too, that there ia no pretence for assuming that this alien vote is due to anything like a sincere consideration of the merits of the case. The English and Scotch vote, it is tolerably notorious, is at the disposal of Mr Gladstone on all questions save those in which tho local interests of England and Scotland are involved. It is neTer withheld when the mere interests of Ireland are concerned. Hvnce it is that the Government have been enabled to Carry all before them in regard to -the introduction of the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, a Coercion Act, and attempted to force on Ireland "a gigantic system* of godless education," and this in the teeth of Irish opinion. What can be more incongruous and absurd than the conduct of English and Scotch Parliamentary representatives in voting for a measure which nil Ireland repudiated ? Such a demand preferred to the English Protestants in the name of Irish secularists would be rejected with insolent contempt. The intolerance with which English and Scotch members refuse to Irish Catholics, whom they deem heretics, the system of education which they rightly demand and insist upon for themselves, is one of the scandals of the age.