The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1911-05-12
LIBERALS FIRM On
HOME RULE ISSUE
GOVERNMENT, THE PRINTER AN.
EoUNCBs, WILL UNswBRvINoLv
KEEP PROMISE TO IRISH

AfNNWOMf AIifN ans-- inc NMNithNmN
rule amendment to the Veto bill. pro.
posing TO exclude from the operation Of
the measure "ahy bill to establish
separate parliament and executive for
ireland, was moved by John r. Ions.
dale, unionist member for Mid.Armagh,
in the house Of commons today. Whips
had been sent out by all parties, and
in consequence the house was crowded.
In introducing the amendment to the
bin intended to restrict the powers of
the house of lords over legislation
originating in tho first chamber, Mr..
Lonsdale said that he desired to see
the question of home rule removed al.
together from the region of the contro-
versy over the reform Of the house Of
lords. The government, he said, was
at the mercy of the nationalists, whose
object was to smash the constitution,
in order to dismember the Empire by
giving to Ireland national independ.
ence.
James Ramsay Macdonald, socialist
and labor member for Leicester, imme.
diately took the field in support of the
nationalist, and contended that the
laborites were whole heartedly in favor
of the devolution demanded for Ireland,
and believed that the projected treaty
of peace with the United States has
been made possible by the promise of
home rule for Ireland
Premier Fim for Home Rule.
Mr.. Asquith, the premier, in few
pointed sentences, gave the house to
understand clearly that the cabinet was
unswervinglY of the opinion that the
electors had returned them to power
with the full knowledge that they
would give ireland measure of home
rule.
The opposition campaign of "dollar
dietation'' further emphasized the fact,
the premier said, that home rule for
Ireland was an issue in the election.
He repudiated the suggestion that there
was any triekery or deceit on the part
of the government, and left no doubt
of his intention to abide by his pledge
to introduce a home rule bill.
A, ]. Balfour, leader of the opposi.
tion, spoke in favor of the amendment,
his remarks being q repetition of his
oft-told argument. The government, he
said, had hidden home rule in the back
ground with the elections and now,
having surreptitiously attained power,
was going to force home rule down the
throats of the people, who, he believed,
if the issue were placed directly before
them, would reject it as they did in
1885 and 1898.
Wants Home Rule All Round"
Duncan Vernon Prize, the liberal
devolutionist from the North Division
of Aberdeen, moved an amendment to
The amendment exempting the estab-
lishnent of an Irish parliament unless
similar legislatures were provided for
the other parts of the United Kingdom.
He hoped that the whole question of
devolution would be settled eventually
by common consent.
Another radical liberal, Captain
Walter Waring, from Banffshire, sup
ported Mr.. Prize, and said that federal
devolution would be the only satisfac
tory settlement of the constitutional
upheaval.
Mr.. Prize withdrew his amendment,
and Mr.. Lonsdale Is amendment was de-
feated, 2s4 to 100.
John George Butcher, unionist mem
Der for York, moved AIN amendment ex-
empting from the operation of clause 3
any bill affecting the continued exist
ence of the crown prerogatives. In
opposing this amendment, Sir Robert
b. Findlay. the encouragement said
! The existence of the crown rested on
the loyalty of the people, and it would
be an evil day for the crown when it
depended for existence upon the lords
veto.
| The Butcher amendment was then de
feated, 273 to 169.