[TO THE EDITOR OW THE "SPECTATOR. "] Sin,—In the Spectator of
August 9th there is an article on "The King and the Constitution," in which, if you will permit me to say so, the arguments against the revival of the Royal veto in the case of the Irish Home Rule Bill are effectively and convincingly stated. The King could not veto any Bill without being suspected of partiality. The excuse that it was done to give the nation an opportunity of declaring itself would not serve. The Cabinet would appeal to the country against the King, and other issues would be largely lost sight of. It would, as you say, be an excellent issue for the Govern- ment, but whether it proved a winning issue for the Ministry or not the result would be unfortunate and perhaps disastrous. But while you rightly oppose the revival of the Royal veto as something full of danger, you do not hesitate to counsel and encourage the Unionists of Ulster to appeal to arms if the Home Rule Bill is passed without having been first submitted to the electors. In an article in your issue of August 2nd, for instance, you say, "Though we hold that an actual right of insurrection in arms belongs to Ulster, we should in no case have any sympathy with attempts by Protestants to drive the Roman Catholics from the work- shops or from their homes." You hold that an actual right of insurrection belongs to Ulster. Perhaps you will say that that is not counselling or encouraging rebellion ; that it is only a statement of opinion. But I think the tone of the Spectator and of the Unionist press and of the Unionist leaders generally is such as to encourage the Protestants of Ulster to continue their show of warlike preparation. Should not all loyal citizens in positions of influence make unmis- takable their disapproval of seditious language and conduct ? The Spectator seems to think civil war, armed revolt against a Bill " passed according to the law of the land," a lesser evil than the dragging of the Sovereign into the party arena. Perhaps it is; but it is at least an evil, and it is an evil that, as the Spectator itself shows, is unnecessary. For, to quote the Spectator once more, " There would (in the event of a Unionist victory at a general election following the passage of the Home Rule Bill) be an immediate passing of a Bill to repeal the Home Rule Act."—I am, Sir, &c., Boston, Mass. : August 18th, 1913. JOHN Molltrem.
Previous page
