Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Monday, 30 Jul 1923

Vol. 1 No. 35

LEAGUE OF NATIONS (GUARANTEE) BILL, 1923. - SECOND STAGE.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH

The motion is that this Bill be now read a second time.

I oppose this Bill. I opposed the motion here before, and the motion was practically the same as the Bill. I opposed the motion when it was introduced some time ago, and I did so for various reasons which I gave at the time. I will not repeat those reasons, although I presume, what is most natural to presume, that everybody has forgotten all about the discussion that took place that day.

On a point of order, this is not a Government Bill, and the Second Reading has not been moved.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH

It is a Government Bill—you were not here when leave was given to introduce it. It is a Government Bill introduced into the Seanad at the request of the Government

Oh, I beg your pardon, I was not aware of that.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH

It is a natural error. The facts were stated when leave was given to introduce it.

The objections I put forward to the motion when first introduced might be summed up by stating that the League of Nations as at present constituted, and in the present conditions that exist in Europe, is no help whatsoever to those who worked for liberty and freedom among the nations. I would not expect a great deal from the League of Nations at present. I would quite understand the League started as it has been, somewhat weak and shaky, and not able to do very much. I would not expect it go to war, to raise Armies, or to start off and oppose great nations like England and France. I would not expect it to use coercion against nations like Poland when it absorbs a great part of Lithuania, but I would expect it not to go against its own decisions and its own statements. When it stated again and again that certain things were unjust I think it is hopeless to find that same League of Nations later on passing a resolution in favour of what it had already stated to be unfair. I would expect it to be an emblem of light on the horizon to guide nations in the direction in which they ought to go. I would expect it to raise its voice against injustice equally whether that injustice be perpetrated by small nations or by powerful nations, whether it was perpetrated by Belgium or Poland, by England or France.

Unfortunately it has done nothing of the sort. If it had I would be the first person to vote for this Bill. But, as far as I have been able to follow it, in numbers of cases it has done the most unjust things in history or in the history of any nation. It has done nothing to help forward the cause of liberty and freedom. After protesting against the action of Poland in absorbing Vilna from Lithuania, and stating repeatedly that these were acts of injustice, they proceed to pass an Act in favour of it, and actually sanctioned the wrong against which they had protested. It has sanctioned the mandates by which certain Arab States have been handed over to the dominion of France and England, although England had made treaties with the Arabs assuring them freedom, promising them in high-flown terms that henceforward they would be free to proceed on their own lines. Instead of insisting that these promises would be carried out, the sanction broke all these promises, imposing the yoke of England on Mesopotamia and Palestine, and making Palestine a Jewish home, to the disadvantage and great objection of the great bulk of the inhabitants. I feel quite sure that if Ireland joined the League of Nations, that instead of being able to reform the League, it will only be dragged into a lot of dirty work which will disgrace it and drag it down in the same mire with other imperialistic nations who are going round annexing land and behaving very improperly.

President Wilson, who brought in the scheme first with his Fourteen Points, was right in his ideas. Everybody approved of them, but he found when he came to Versailles that he got entangled in a net, and not one of these Fourteen Points was carried out since except when other countries rebelled and fought. It was never done peaceably. Another point is the question of money. We were told the last time that it would cost us £7,000 or £8,000, or something like that. Does that include the whole cost, of all the clerks and envoys we may send there and the buildings we may have to put up? Does that include everything, or does it include only entry into the League —subscriptions to the League? I think if that is not seen to we might find ourselves afterwards let in for a very big bill. These are really only preliminary expenses. I voted against the First Reading of the Bill the other day. I was the only person who did, and it was an unusual proceeding which I would not take under any other circumstances. The reason I did vote against it was because I think it is very improper for a Government in its last stages, just before the elections, when it may be in or out of power, to bring the country into a permanent condition by implicating it in the League of Nations and in the trouble arising therefrom without giving the country a chance of deciding. There is no reason except that the first meeting may begin probably before the elections are over here. This is a temporary Parliament. It does not attempt to be anything else.

The Government under difficult circumstances took up a certain job. By law and by arrangement their job was to end in December, and yet this Government endeavours to plunge us into those permanent difficulties and endeavours to pledge the country for years to the League of Nations. I think that is an improper thing, and there is no reason for it. Nearly all the Bills that we have been asked to pass have been temporary ones. The Land Bill was, perhaps, an exception, and then there were very grave problems to be dealt with. This Bill merely tries to force the opinion of the Government on the whole country without the country being allowed to form its own opinion. I oppose the Second Reading.

When the suggestion was made, in the first instance, that the Saorstát should join the League of Nations, I think it was made in a somewhat irregular manner. On that occasion I asked the Minister whether it was intended to lay the matter before the two Houses. It came as a surprise to the Seanad that the matter was not laid before both Houses. Under the present Bill, however, whether or not it was on the strength of that remonstrance, both Houses are to be consulted, and the joining or not joining in the League of Nations will be decided by the Oireachtas. As to the merits of the Bill, I think it is probably right that Ireland should join and I will record my vote in favour of the Second Reading.

I would like to obtain some information from the Minister in regard to this Bill. We were told that the reason we ought to join the League of Nations is that Ireland is now a nation, and it will speak for itself in the League of Nations. I understand that what are called the Dominions do not speak separately for themselves; but when they are gathered into what we would call a Committee, a spokesman representing the British Empire speaks for them as a whole. I would like some information from the Minister on that subject. If what I have stated is the case, I think we ought to be very wary before adopting this Bill. I am sorry the two gentlemen whose names backed the Bill are not here, because they might have given me that information. I want to know what nations are represented in the League outside of what we know as the Allied group. I also want to know at what date the application was made to enter the League by the Government or by the Executive Council.

With regard to the questions put by Senator Mrs. Wyse Power, the nations known as Dominions are represented separately in the Assembly as the League of Nations. They are always represented separately, and they are not represented by any representative of the British Empire group.

I know they are represented by their own representatives, but do those representatives speak separately for their own individual nations, or do they speak only through one representative for the whole?

As I have stated, they speak separately for their own countries. With regard to the nations that are in the League, there are fifty-two nations, and it is much easier to give the list of the nations who are not in the League. They are as follows:— Abyssinia, Afghanistan, Germany, Iceland, Mexico, Russia, Turkey, and United States. I want to correct a mistake that was made by Senator Colonel Moore. He speaks about this being a permanent Bill, whereas all other Bills are on a temporary basis, and he talks about committing this country to the League of Nations for ever, whereas in regard to other Bills changes could be made. As a matter of fact, any country can withdraw from the League of Nations within a period of two years, so there is nothing permanent about the Bill. Prior to the Seanad coming into existence a resolution was passed by the Dáil, when the Dáil was the sole Executive, calling upon the Executive Council to take steps to join the League of Nations as soon as it seemed desirable. We proposed acting on that, but an independent resolution was brought forward in this House some months ago, and I think it was Senator Guinness pointed out at the time that the Oireachtas should be consulted in the matter of joining the League of Nations. Joining the League of Nations is, as I explained, actually an Executive act, but I did not wish to act in any way contrary to the wishes of the Oireachtas, and this Bill is brought in with a view to having both Houses register their opinion on the matter. As you will see, the Bill is a short one. It has reference to Article 1 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, which says that a nation applying for admission to the League shall give effective guarantees of its sincere intention to observe its international obligations, and shall accept such regulations as may be prescribed by the League in regard to its military, naval, and air forces and armaments. We have already in the Treaty an arrangement which defines to some extent the extent of the Free State's military equipment. The Senator will, I think, remember that clause, so we propose in this Bill that the Executive be empowered to give the required guarantees—that is to say, a guarantee that we intend to keep our international undertakings, and to agree to regulations prescribed by the League in regard to military, naval, and air forces and armaments.

That is the purport of the Bill, and it raises the whole question as to whether the Free State should or should not join the League. I pointed out that there are only some half a dozen nations not already in the League. It will be agreed that, seeing there are 52 nations members of the League, and only eight not members of the League, and recognising that, on the whole, in the world good does outweigh evil, and that the declared objects of the League are such as we are whole-heartedly in accord with, no harm could be done by joining the League, and, I think, certain definite good can be done by joining. We become the fifty-third nation that has joined. Senator Colonel Moore has pointed out several defects in the League. I have said before that it is an aspiration, not an accomplishment. Every country does cling very much to its own rights and its own sovereignty, and in order to have perfection it would mean that there would have to be a bigger abrogation of countries' powers than any country is prepared to give. The League, therefore, has so far done very good work, but it has also had to compromise very often, and I quite recognise that it has had more or less to sanction things that are not in keeping with the principle of its declared objects.

With regard to financial commitments, I admit it is difficult to give a definite answer. So far there has been rather a rough-and-ready arrangement about the subscriptions given by the various nations to the League. Those subscriptions have largely been based on the subscription given by the various countries to the International Postal Union. So far we are not a member of the International Postal Union, and will not be a member for some months, and also, owing to the smallness of the Postal Union unit, the arrangement could not be worked on that mathematically. I estimate that our subscription to the League should be something equivalent to the subscription given by New Zealand, which is at present 10 units, and I think it will roughly be about £10,000. There is no question, of course, of building any special buildings or anything like that; there is a question of representation. Seeing that at the sittings of the League there are 52 nations represented, it is necessary, whether we be members or not, to have a representative and an office there, which we have at the present moment. It is necessary both diplomatically and for the purpose of trade to have such representation there.

Joining the League means additional expense in our subscription to the League, which I estimate at about £10,000 or £10,500—I think it can hardly be more than that—and the expenses of the delegation, which will be sent there annually in the month of September. It would not be anything very considerable, and I think that my first estimate, in which I put the sum at £15,000, should be adequate to cover the whole annual expenses of our member ship of the League. Senator Mrs. Wyse Power has asked me on what date our application to the League was made. It was made a few days before the motion was introduced here—actually on the 17th April. These are the points I wish to bring out, namely, that although the League is not perfect, it aims at perfection, and its general objects are in accord with the mind of the people of this country, because I think, if ever any country stood for universal peace, this country, having had a fairly considerable experience of war, does stand for universal peace. We have to recognise the fact that it is not a perfect organisation. Arising as it did immediately after the Great War, it was inevitable that it should not be. We recognise the additional expense, but we think that it will be well-spent money, because we have found that most countries do not actually understand that we have that full and complete independence possessed by Canada. It was made very difficult for them to understand that during the last year, as the situation here was quite impossible for outside people to understand properly. We do not live alone, and the League has many Committees which deal with other business. We have, for instance, already sent a representation to the International Committee dealing with tariffs. The thing is not necessarily permanent, because we are only birds of passage. We commit this country only to the period of two years, and if, after the next election, there is a new Government here who disagree with the policy of being members of the League, they can take immediate steps to withdraw from it, and they will be out of the League long before the succeeding election takes place.

Question: "That this Bill be read a second time," put and agreed to.

AN CATHAOIRLEACH

This Bill contains three clauses, which are only declaratory of the objects of the Bill and of the League. I do not know whether the Seanad would desire to put the Bill now through its remaining stages.

I beg to move the suspension of the Standing Orders to enable the further stages of the Bill to be taken to-day.

I beg to second.

Question put and agreed to.
Question: "That this Bill be taken in Committee," put and agreed to.
Top
Share