New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-11-14
AN4LOGJES or HOME PULE.

Lord Lorne has furnished The Contemporary
Reriew with some interesting notes on Cana
dian Home Rule. His reflections point TO the
general conclusion that the experience of the
provinces, like that of the States of the Amcn-
can Union, shows that while local matters may
safely be left to provincial assemblies, it is all
important that no section of the country shall
be Organized in such strength rs to be able to
frame a policy involving conflict with other
sections. He defines Canadian Home Rule rs
the right of each province in the Confederation
10 make laws on purely domestic matters. He
maintains that the French Canadian race are
thoroughly loyal to the Anglo-SaxOn Contcdcra-
ton and TO the British Empire, and that no
question can be raised which will unite any Sec
ton of the population or of the country against
the central Government, whose best policy Is TO
divide the ground under the "scvctal local
authorities and give to them definite ana
limited power" Apparently he considers the
future of the Confederation secure because all
race aud agIarian questions have been settled
by the province, and the central Government Is
supreme m all but local legislation.
A, an abstract study of Canadian Home Rule
Lord Lornc', essay i, precise in statement ana
logical in deduction. lie had been asked how
ever. for comparative study, which would DIS
cu,s the subject IL bearing on the future Aus
tralan Confederation. and especially ON the de-
mand, of the Irish Nationalist. 80 far as the
Australian State, are concerned, his remarks
have a practical application \ scheme OF con
f,drration in the South Seas similar to that OF
British America i entirely practicable. There
is, indeed. no Australian Quebec with an alien
language. race and religion. A central Govern
mc1t on the ba,, of provincial rights and def
pitc principlr, of Home Rule will undoubtedly
be- Organized 50 soon rs the provinces can come
to an agreement in reference to the tarlit policy.
Lord Lornc does not make this application.
although the analogicS are very close, but lays
.tr.,, upon the difficulty of comparing the CIR
cum,tanccs of countries so dissimar a. Ireland
and the British dependencies III America. lie
refer, to the vast area OF the Canadian PROV
incc, and contrasts il with the limited extent OF
Ireland. overlooking the fact that the popuIa-
ton of the two countries Is about the same
and finally, he emphasizes the fact that while
fine nroyincc, are accorded Home Rule III mat
ter, of local legislation no member OF the Con
federation i, allowed to oppose effectively the
central Government. which represents the ma
iorty of the entire population. lhls Is MS re-
ply 10 Irish Nationalist and to their Canadian
svnpathizcrs, who demand for the island NyS-
fem of self government analogous to that CAlst-
Ing in the Dominion.
Now il is plain that while Australia presents Il
striking parallel TO the Canadian provinces III
a,much rs it comprises various States Wlth
nroyincial Legislatures icaOuSly protecting the
prjuciplc of Home Rule. Lord Lornc has not Sc
Icctcd the right ground for comparison IN the
case or Ircluad. When the Pamcitcs argue
that the island is entitled to as much Sclt-go
,,u,,cut and Home Rule as the Dominion OF
Canada enjoys, they do not refer to the pro-
vinciaI Legislatures at Quebec, Halifax or
KINGSTON. but 10 the central Parliament ut OF
tawa. They want Home Rule, not in the sense
in which each Canadian province has IT, out as
thc British possessions in America taken as one
body have it. TO use European illustrations
thcy do not demand the rights exercised by the
seventeen provincial diets OF German AuStIla,
hut a national Legislature such as Hungary ac-
ouircd under the Compromise. OF 1867. Inc
Irish NatiOnalistS are no better satisfied with
the privilege of representation III the Imperial
Parliament at Westminster than the MHgyarS
we're with Schmcrling's centralized Parliament,
to which they refused to send delegates year
after year. We are not arguing the abstract
question whether this is or is not IN equitable
demand on the part of the Irish Home Rulers
ar whether they have been Justified Ill making
Use of agraran controversy, AwlcSsneSS ana
murder i'm order TO keep the political question be-
fore the people Our purpose has SIMPLY Occn
to point out the tue analogy between HOme
Rule in the Dominion Parliament at Ottawa,
and that National system OF legislation which
the Irish party has made the objective point of
its campaign.