Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-02-19
FOR A WORLD UNION
William 7. Stead Talks of an
Anglo-Saxon Nation.
CECIL RHODES IS QUOTED
Great 1mperialist Was Willing Eng
land Should Be a State.
NOT AFRAID OF RECIPROCITY
Great Britain Sure of Canadian
Loyalty-Home Rule for Ire
land Seems Assured.
BY WILLIAM T. STEAD.

By WILLIAM T. STEAD.
Special Cablegram TO The Star
LONDON. February 1S.-We are all
much amused by the fuss which has been
made by Champ Clark's facetious remark
that reciprocity opens the door to an
nexation. Annexation is bad word. AS
Similation, permeation, fraterniZation-
any of these words would have been bet
ter. To annex means to take what does
not belong to you. with or without the
consent of the annexed, and so far from
resenting the idea that closer political
union will naturally follow from greater
commercial intercourse. there is nothing
move devoutly to he desired.
We are SO sure of Canadian LOYALTY tina {
we encourage rather than. discourage
every increase in her intimacy with the
states. whether that be commercial, ju-
dicial Or political. What we desire after
the tiff of 40 years ago is that John Bull
shall remarry Miss Columbia, or, if you
prefer it, Uncle Sam should WOO and wed
Madame Brittania. Now Canada is a coy
parlor for counting.
Says Knox Went Too Far.
Secretary KnoX'S eloquent words as to
the ties that unite Canada and the United
States might be applied almost without
alteration of word to Great Britain and
the United States. When he says there
is not the slightest possibility that a racial
and moral union will involve any political
change he goes too far, for as other ties
multiply political changes will become
necessary A general arbitration treaty
is a forerunner of many such.
Dreamers are already talking of the
United States of the World. and it is not
such a far cry to the United States of the
EnSlish-Speaking world, and Clark $
speech. although intended as a jest, has
set peoples minds moving in the right
direction.
Remember that it was Cecil Rhodes, the
high priest OF British imperialism, who
declared that he attached so much i'm
portance to the Anglo-American union
that II 1t could not be obtained otherwise
than by applying for admission as states
to be federated with the American repub-
lie he would apply for admission.
Prospects for Home Rule.
1t is extraordinary how purblind some
politicians can be when confronted with
4. situation which they dislike. Wednes-
day night keen unionists assured me
confidentially that the government would
not be able to defeat the anti-home rule
amendment by more than sixty votes
Within a couple of hours it was rejected
by a majority Of lib. The ministers
moreover, definitely pledge themselves to
make the home rule bin the first order
of the day at the next session. Home
rule, it is now clear, will not split the
ministerial majority.
II the veto bill is passed this session
the home rule bill will be introduced in
1912 and rejected by the lords. 1t will
be reintroduced in 1913 and will be again
rejected by the lords. 1t will then be in
troduced in the autumn session and pass
ed over the lords veto. If all goes well
the bill ought to receive the royal assent
before New Year day in 1914
unionists will fight the bill to the bitter
end. 1t is probable the passing of the
veto bill will convince the tory majority
that they would do better by a timely
compromise than by persisting in ire
concilable opposition. What ought to be
vention by royal commission, which
would sit this autumn in Dublin for the
purpose of enabling the Irish nation to
discuss and decide what kind of home
rule 1t desires.
If Ireland wants home rule and Irish
men are fit to govern Ireland under
home rule, they must be fit to define
the nature of the constitutional instru-
ment, under which they will be ready to
undertake the responsibility of governing
their own country. but strangely enough
this appears to be the last thing the Irish
LEADERS seem to desire.
This is due to a fatal weakness which
has been engendered by a century of
English rule and Irish faction. l eX-
pounded this idea to an eminent minister
who had himself taken part in framing
home rule bill. He listened sympa-
thetically enough, but when said had
not yet submitted the proposal to Red
mond and Dillon, he replied:
A Curious Contradiction.
They'll see you damned before they'll
accept it."
There is likely to be struggle over
this, the Irish insisting that the Eng
fish, Scotch and Welsh cabinet shall
frame a home rule bill for Ireland
while the English. Welsh and Scotch
will insist in the first instance that the
Irish will tell us what they want.
A Curious Contradiction.
1t is a curious Irish situation, the
natural role being reversed. When
Gladstone introduced his home rule bill
Parnell agreed that Ireland should con-
tribute to the imperial exchequer. To-
day Ireland pays nothing for the i'm
perial services, pays nothing to the
national debt, and in addition. receives
an annual subsidy of 12,5O0,O00.
The problem before the Irish leaders
is simply this: Under home rule is Ire
land to be subsidized from Westminster,
or is she to pay her own way out of
her own resources? Redmond and Dill
lon want somebody else but themselves
to face the responsibility of formulating
a definite answer to that question.
1t is Il suggestive fact that in Glad
stones time home rule was advocated
by those who disliked the empire. where
as today home rule is advocated chiefly
because of the effect this is likely to
have in strengthening the empire. Home
rule is welcomed by Eng.ishmen because
of their hope and belief that if home
rule We're granted it would be possible
to draw still closer the ties that unite
Britain and the United States. Roose-
Welt told King George bluntly that until
home rule is conceded there would al
ways be the obstacles of fraternal re-
union between the empire and the re-
public