ULSTER AND THE REFERENDUM
SIE,—The Home Rule Bill is dead. It was dead from the moment when Mr. Asquith made his speech of February 10th on the Address in reply to the Speech from the Throne. Many Liberals and a few Conservatives have wished that the Home Rule question could be settled and out of the way. Mr. Asquith this week has confessed that instead of settlement his Bill would result in bloodshed (civil strife). That being so, it is impossible for any patriot (and Mr. Asquith's speech on Monday was the speech of a true patriot) to proceed with the Home Rule Bill. The Parliament Act has broken in the hands of its authors. Mr. Asquith (with Nonconformist blood in his veins) was sure when it came to the pinch to shrink
from using physical force to make men who have been industrious, law-abiding, and loyal submit themselves to men who have exhibited none of these three qualities. Where Mr. Gladstone failed Mr. Asquith was never likely to succeed. Never again will a Liberal Government propose separate Parliaments for different portions of the United Kingdom.
As you, Sir, have so often declared in the Spectator, "it will be found in the end that the Union divides Ireland the least." Not many hours, days, or weeks must elapse before the nation realizes the truth of your dictum. I fancy that the very words "Home Rule" will be most distasteful to the present Cabinet, and that if any one brings forward Home Rule for Scotland or Wales he will be assured beforehand of a very chilly reception. But what of the future? It is inexpressibly unfortunate that the Government have been com- pelled to capitulate to the threat of armed force. But what could be done with the veto of the people destroyed by the Parliament Act P Mr. Ramsay MacDonald was right when on Monday he protested against the bad precedent which had been set by the Government in capitulating to force, or Ulster's threats of force.
Something must be done, and done quickly, to restore the veto of the people, destroyed by the mutilation of the Con- stitution under the Parliament Act. It can only be done by the Referendum. Mr. Asquith has proposed a Referendum for Ulster, Mr. Bonar Law has asked for a Referendum of the United Kingdom on Home Rule. If on Home Rule, why not on other subjects ? We must, if we are to save our country from riots and revolution, let the people feel that they are the masters. Nothing can be so conservative and nothing so democratic as the Referendum. If the Unionist leaders will tell the nation that at the next General Election they will claim no mandate for anything except to turn this Government out, and that on every important change proposed the people, and not the caucus, shall have the final word, then the Unionists can bring forward anything they like—Tariff Reform, Food Taxes, anything they like— and those who, like myself, are sick of the caucus, sick of party, will possess our souls in patience, secure in the know- ledge that the people, and not the party caucus, will have the last word. With the Referendum it will matter little which party is in power, or even if the House of Lords remains in its present mutilated condition. Whenever any industry or Church is assailed it will defend itself, and the people will do justly, for they are neither bad nor fools—I am. Sir, &c.,
The Waterhouse, Bollington, Macclesfield. E. L. °Lives.
Previous page
