New-York tribune., 1913-09-14

I'VE have won There will be no
Homo Rule
So says a man who for the last two
months has been one Of the soldiers in
Tho fight for the unity Of the Kingdom.
He added
Two days ago could not have said
il FIR some weeks We have thought
NO we're going to win. Our hopes have
,.rovn stronger. To-day they are GER
,o,rtics. There viii be no Home Rule" ="
naturally asked why he was so con
rdent and whether he would explain
vbst il was that made him so. He re
torted:
Have I ever misled YOU? Do YOU
think l would tell you what | do un-
less knew?'
He was deeply moved. II true. IL
was a momentous announcement. But
7 pointed out to him that there had
always been Cnionists who believed
that the Union would be saved and
that the scheme Of Disunion known as
Irish Home Rule would be defeated.
II was defeated in 1856. Ii was de-
feated in 1895. But il had been re-
viyed. II had been put in q new form;
embodied in the Bill now before Parlia-
ment; a much worse bill than either
Of the others; supported by a corrupt
Coalition which had held together for
seven years; with majority in the
House of more than a hundred. To pre-
pare the way for it. the ancient Consu-
tuition of the realm had been destroyed.
The Parliament Act had been passed
The House Of Lords, which IN 1875
had thrown out the second Home Rule
lhiil, had no longer the power 10 reject
but only TO delay. The new bill had
already been passed twice by the
House OF Commons. The same House
was still in existence. The same ma
iority controlled il. The same Ministry
was in power. a Ministry which had
overthrown not only the permanent
legislative authority of the House OF
Lords. but the independence Of the
House Of Commons; and substituted
for IL the unchecked despotism Of the
Ministry itself: a despotism exercised
in obedience TO the will Of the Irish
Nationalist leader in the House, Mr..
Redmond. The existence Of the Min
istry. the existence Of Mr.. Redmond
himself as Irish leader. depended on
the ultimate passage Of this Home Rule
bill.
They have thercforc-both the Min
istry and the Irish ieader-every mo-
tive. except the motive Of patriotism,
10 force the bill through to inscribe it
on the Statute Book as the law OF the
land After it has been read third
time next May, the House Of Lords has
no longer the legal right 10 reject 1t.
1t passes over the heads Of the Upper
House into the hands Of the Sovereign.
Il may be said that in theory the Sow
ereign has still the constitutional right
Of veto. But no Sovereign has exer-
cised that right since Queen Anne. IN
1907, refused her assent 10 Scotch
militia bill. If the right has not per-
lshed by dcsuetude in that long period,
il is in allegiance. Do YOU think the
present King the kind Of man likely to
revive IL and 10 enforce Il at The risk
Of Q conflict with an all powerful and
totally unscrupulous Ministry; and per-
haps at the risk Of his Throne?
To this long speech my friend listened
with civility il not with patience; and
he made this reply
Everything you say is true and
everything but the last sentence or two
might have been omitted: or might
have been kept for your next ietter 10
The Tribune There il would be- useful,
because your people need reminding Of
;scts which. in order 10 maintain their
purely sentimental view of Home Rule.
they habitually forget. But You have
unwittingly touched at the end of your
harangue the true point; the point
which has now become vital.
Il do not say thai the King will veto
the Home Rule bill I say that he
would veto it II ii were sent up to him.
But IL viii never reach him, because
Ministers know, or viii know, and the
Prime Minister knows now. that if IL
be sent 10 him he will refuse to sign it,.
lie will veto il. The message from the
Throne will he in the words which
every Sovereign has used in the excr-
else Of this prerogatiye; lie rOi S'driScr0.
You will ask me how ] know and
whether ] am i'm the confidence of His
Majesty. am moi in the confidence OF
His Majesty. I have had no cOmmuni-
cation with or from him. But am in
the confidence OF men in very dif-
ferent position from mine: OF men who
have means Of laying their views before
the King, and of learning his views.
have been, I'm my humble way, acting
with these men. II is from them that
my knowledge comes. Of course
hame no names. To you II is not nee
essary. To the public il would be in
ciscrcct n YOU do not believe me you
would believe them. The difference is
mat tell you what know and they
Probably would not. Aud ! not only
NH YOU but give you leave 70 repeat
What ] say and 20 make any use OF IL
!eu Ike