The Annual Register 1914: A Review of Public Events at Home and Abroad for the Year 1914Anonymous
History
The Annual Register 1914: A Review of Public Events at Home and Abroad for the Year 1914
Anonymous
History, Modern; History, Modern -- Periodicals; World War, 1914-1918
It was thought that this speech had opened a fresh prospect of
settlement, and this was confirmed by the opening of next day's debate.
Mr. Dillon (N.) welcomed the tendency to conciliation, but declared
that for the Unionists exclusion was simply a political weapon, while
the Nationalist acceptance of the Government's proposal was inspired
solely by a desire for peace. A referendum would not produce a poll of
50 per cent. in Great Britain. Federalism he disliked as implying a
written constitution, but it was not barred by the Bill. If there was
an agreement, the Bill might be amended either by the Lords inserting
the agreed amendments, or by the Home Rule Bill. The Nationalists would
do all they could to secure peace, but must not be asked to do what
they could not do and what their people would not permit. Sir R. Finlay
(U.), however, pressed for a general election; the Solicitor-General
effectively put the Liberal and Nationalist case, and Mr. O'Brien
(N.) strongly deprecated exclusion and urged a Conference. The debate
was cut short by the Labour motion on the rights of British citizens
within the Empire (p. 73), and was resumed on April 2 by Mr. Balfour,
who said that the discussion had shifted from the Home Rule Bill to
the avoidance of civil war. The conciliatory tone of the debate meant
that the House was frightened. Under a voluntary system they could
not prevent the Army having its own views; it had to obey orders,
but questions arose beyond the day-to-day code, and the Army ought
not to have them put to it. After again demanding a referendum or a
general election, he said that, though he had never been a believer
in Federalism, if some moderate form of devolution met with general
acceptance, and would avert civil war, he would not oppose it, but
Ulster must be treated separately meanwhile. The President of the
Local Government Board declared that Mr. Balfour's doctrine would make
the mess-room a debating society. He had rather the Liberal party
was beaten on other issues than that it won on this. He said most
emphatically that there was no secret obligation of any sort between
the Government and the Nationalists; that an election was not wanted,
and would settle nothing, and that the election held after the passing
of the Bill, and adverse to the Liberals, would mean that they would
consent not to the repeal of the whole Bill, but to the exclusion
of Ulster. It was only after the Bill passed that Federalism could
be discussed. Later Mr. Agar-Robartes (L., _Cornwall, St. Austell_)
attacked the Ministry and advocated giving Ulster a second option at
the end of six years; and Mr. Cave (U.) inclined to devolution.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account