New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1921-08-27
Lloyd Georges Reply

OAA' Nc DlltlSn government are
profoundly disappointed by your let
ter Of August %. You write OF the
conditions of the meeting between US
as though no meeting had ever taken
place.
must remind you, there fore, that
when | asked you to meet me six
weeks ago I made no preliminary
conditions of any sort You came to
London on that invitation and ex-
changed views with me at three meet
lngs Of considerable length. The
proposals I made to you after those
meetings were based upon full and
sympathetic consideration of the
views which you expressed
They were not made in any hag-
CLING spirit. On the contrary, my
colleagues and I went to the very
limit Of our powers in endeavoring
to reconcile British and Irish inter
ests. Our proposals have gone far
beyond all precedent and have been
approved as liberal by the whole Of
the civilized world. Even in quar-
ters which had shown sympathy with
the most extreme Of the Irish claims
they arc regarded as the utmost
which the empire can reasonably
offer or Ireland reasonably expect
Further Farley Futile if
Some Basis h Not Found
The only criticism of them have
yet heard outside Ireland is from
those who maintain that our pro-
posals have overstepped both war
rant and wisdom in their iberality.
Your letter shows no recognition of
this, and further negotiations must,
I fear, be futile unless some definite
progress is made toward acceptance
Of basis.
You declare' cur proposals. involve
the surrender Of Irelnnd's whole ma
tional tradition and reduce her to
subservicnce. What are the facts?
Under the settlement we outlined
Ireland would control every nerve
and fiber of her national existence
She would speak her own language
and make her own religious life. She
would have complete power over
taxation and finance, subject only to
an agreement for keeping trade and
transport rs free ns possible between
herself and Great Britain, her best
market.
She would have uncontrolled au-
thority over education and all moral
and spiritual interests Of her race,
she would have it also over law and
order, over land and agriculture, over
conditions of labor and industry, over
the health and homes of her people
and over her own defense.
She would, in fact, within the
shores of Ireland be free in every
respect Of national activity, national
expression and national development.
The states of the American Union,
sovereign though they be, enjoy 10
such range Of rights.
Our proposals go even further, for
they invite Ireland to take her place
as a partner in the, great common
wealth Of free nations, united by al
legiance to the King.
We consider these proposals com
pletely fulfill your wish that the
principle of government by consent
of the governed should be the broad
and guiding principle Of the settle
ment which your plenipoten.iaries
are to negotiate. That principle was
first developed in England and is the
handspring of the representative in
stitutions which she was first to Gre
ate, 1t was spread by her through
out the world and is now the very
life Of the British commonwealth.
Sees Old Breaches Healed
If Terms Were Accepted
We could not have invited the Irish
people to take their place in that
commonwealth on any other prin-
ciple, and we are convinced that
tuIOuSu IL ~ t Col lc6A OlO lulSuuueI-
standings and achieve an enduring
partnership as honorable to Ireland
as to the other nations of which the
commonwealth consists.
But when you argue that the rela-
tons of Ireland with the British en-
pire are comparable in principle to
those of Holland or Belgium with the
German empire find it necessary to
repeat once more that those are
premises which no British govern
ment, whatever its complexion, can
ever accept.
In demanding that Ireland should
be treated as a separate sovereign
power, with no allegiance to the
crown and no loyalty TO the sister
nations Of the comm onwealth, you
are advancing claims which the most
famous Nationalist leaders in Irish
history. from Grattan to Parnell and
Redmond, have explicitly disowned.
Grattan in a famous phrase de-
clared that "The ocean protests
against separation and the sea
against union. Daniel O'Connell.
most eloquent perhaps Of all the