Los Angeles herald., 1910-07-02
KINGS OATH STILL
OFFENDS IRELAND
Dublin Corporation Condemns the
Wording at Special Meeting.
Demands Change Made
PROTEsTANTs AID CATHOLICS
King Right if He Believes in
Spoken Sentiments, Is
Members Sentiment

DUBLIN, July 1.-Ireland is still
moving for a Modification of the
kings oath. A special meeting of the
Dublin corporation was held to pass a
resolution demanding that the words
which are regarded as offensive by
Roman Catholics should be deleted
from the declaration.
Six of the Unionist members had
signed a communication which had
! been forwarded to the lord mayor,
stating that as the resolution to be
proposed practically advocated the en-
tire abolition of the declaration they
would, if they attended, have to speak
| and vote against the resolution. They
| had, therefore, decided to abstain from
attending the meeting, as they consid-
cred such action the most dignified
manner of entering their protest
| against the resolution.
The lord mayor, in proposing the
resolution, said that he thought the
| Protestant members of the council
might have attended and co-operated
with their colleagues in having the
| declaration removed from the statute
book. He thought the time had come
when Irishmen of all creeds and
| classes should cooperate to break
down the barriers of former days, now
Alderman McWalter, who seconded
the resolution, said that the proper
way to give the resolution influence
was by presenting a petition before
| the bar of the house of commons.
The lord mayor said that he had re-
| ceived a telegram from Mr.. Crozier,
one of the Protestant members, hop
ing that the council would pass the
resolution.
Alderman Reign said their protest
| could not be too strong in asserting
| their rights to freedom of conscience.
| He did not agree with the suggestion
that this matter should be brought by
| the lord mayor before the bar Of the
| house.
Alderman Farrell said that he would
| treat the whole thing with contempt
and would pray for the conversion of
| the king. If the king believed the
declaration was true he was perfectly
right in making 1t, but if he believed 1t
was false then the king and the people
of England were guilty Of mortal sin.
Alderman Kelly (Sinn Fein) said that
| he did not agree with this bar of the
| house of commons business. Perhaps
the lord mayor was, like the kaiser, I'M
pressed with England's greatness, and
wanted to get back there again. Any
| one who knew the history of that
declaration knew that it was political
more than religious, and If there was
any sort of sincerity among English
parties this declaration would have
| been removed long since. Personally
| he did not care three straws what King
| George swore, but, while he Joined in
the protest, he considered that the
worst feature of all was the stand
taken by their Protestant fellow coun-
| trymen.
The resolution was then put and car
ried unanimously.
Alderman McWalter moved that 1t
be brought before the bar of the house
| of commons, but this vas ruled out of
order, and the meeting ended.
The public boads of the south of Ire
land are agitating for a modification of
| the kings declaration. At Limerick
| two such resolutions were unanimously
passed. Lord Emily, at the county agri-
cultural board, moved a resolution plac-
ing on record their horror and detesta-
tion of the tenor and terms of the
declaration, and demanding from the
government the erasure Of the terms,
which were an insult to the intelligence
| and Christianity of the English people.
| The resolution was seconded by Mr.
| Winter, a Protestant member. At a
meeting of the Limerick board of
guardians Mr.. O'Grady Delmege, a
Protestant member, proposed a similar
resolution. Both resolutions were unan-
imously adopted.