I have, but it is an attempt to narrow down the circumstances under which a particular type of conflict, which causes conditions here approximating to war conditions in which we would be not actually a belligerent, could be said to exist. I do not think it is within the wit of man to devise a phrase which will prevent, in certain circumstances, an unscrupulous majority from betraying its democratic obligations and overturning democracy if it considers itself strong enough to do so. I think there is no use in trying to provide against all possible things of that sort. A democracy, any representative government, in order to be successful has to be run according to rules, has to have popular opinion behind it and to be supported in that way. If at any time, an occasion should arise, when the majority could so flout the ideals of representative government, it would be done otherwise and there would be an end to this system of government. I think, therefore, we would give ourselves fruitless trouble in trying to devise a phrase which would narrow down the definition. There was a suggestion made in the Dáil that the President as guardian of the Constitution —it was not put in these precise terms —might be brought in as an outside referee to say whether such an emergency had in fact arisen and that his concurrence with the resolutions of the two Houses might be obtained. Well, that was an idea which had not suggested itself in that particular form to us who were dealing with this matter though it had existed in another form. Difficulty would arise if we go beyond what is obviously a verbal amendment of the Constitution, because I held the view, when the Constitution was being discussed, that when we spoke of a time of war, we had in mind conditions such as the conditions which would obtain in this country when Great Britain went to war and our vital interests would be affected in such a manner that it would be necessary for the Executive to be armed with powers such as I have indicated.
I think the Oireachtas can agree to this amendment of the Constitution. I promised in the Dáil that I would consider the matter again before the period has elapsed in which it is possible to amend the Constitution by legislation, to see whether it is possible to give some further guarantees such as might be implied by having the concurrence of the President. In this particular case, we shall have the concurrence of the President, because if the President thought there was an attempt being made at this particular time by a majority in both Houses to subvert the Constitution, he could refuse to sign this measure and he could insist on the will of the country being obtained about it.
The President, as you know, according to the Constitution, has the power to say: "I cannot sign that; you have got to get the opinion of the people upon it". So, if the President in this particular case, signs the Bill, we may take it as his concurrence with the opinion of the Dáil and the Seanad that the emergency which we envisage in this Article in the Constitution immediately occurs. That does not, of course, provide for the future. I shall consider whether similar concurrence of some such sort should not be necessary in order that the Dáil and the Seanad by majority resolutions should say that a state of emergency exists.
I do not think it is necessary for me to say more. Members of the Seanad are aware of the situation that is facing us. It would appear that we are going to be faced with another terrible European War. As I said in the Dáil, the interests of our country, in the view of the Government, would be best served by trying to keep our country out of it. One of the Deputies in the Dáil asked whether that meant that we were indifferent. I do not want to suggest by that that individuals in this country are indifferent to the conflict that is taking place, but our individual sympathies are one matter; the action which the Government should take on behalf of the nation, for the protection of the vital interests of the nation, is quite another. It is in our capacity as guardians of the interests of our people that we put before Parliament a policy to try to preserve this nation from war, and to keep as neutral as conditions will make it possible for us so to do. Undoubtedly we are a next-door neighbour of Britain and, being in that situation relative to her, and not in a similar situation relative to the other parties to the conflict, it does mean that, in that particular case, there will be difficulties which we have not, perhaps at the moment at any rate, got to face in regard to the more remote contestant. There will have to be an arrangement made for carrying on our trade, the greatest part of our trade, in the market in which we sell most of our supplies and the source from which we get most of our essential commodities. Arrangements will have to be made for the continuance of that particular trade and in a variety of ways like that we shall be brought into closer contact—"contact" is the best word I can use in the circumstances—with Britain than we are likely to be with the other parties to the contest. However, we are determined to keep our country out of war if we can.
I said a long time ago in the Dáil, but it was not appreciated, that it is one thing to desire to keep neutral, to desire to keep out of conflict, but that it is not sufficient to have the will. We want to have the way and the power to prevent use being made of our position in favour of one or other of the parties. It is necessary for us to have the power to do that. It is not sufficient to have a good-will towards other people; they may not have good-will towards you in return. It may happen that though you may not wish to injure any one of the contending parties, they may make up their minds that it would be useful for them to pretend, let us say, that you were injuring their interests and, therefore, try one way or another to use whatever power they might possess to interfere with your legitimate rights. One, therefore, has to prepare oneself to preserve one's rights. I have no doubt, anxious as are the times that are ahead, that our people will, if called upon, defend our interests as other people would defend their interests if they were attacked. We are anxious about the situation, naturally. We deplore the situation that has arisen, but I think we can face it as courageously and with as bold a heart as any other people can. Therefore, whilst I mention this necessity, I do not want to make it appear at all that we find ourselves in a position in which we would not be able, reasonably, to defend our rights. I think we shall.
I said also that, whatever might be the individual opinions of members of the community, our history and the fact that portion of our territory is still cut off from the nation makes any other course for this nation—whatever sympathies it might have—or for the responsible Government in this country, impossible. So not merely is it a question of our opinion that it is important for the State to keep out of this war, but I believe it is the only course possible and that, no matter what Government was in office, it could in the circumstances adopt no other course. I ask the Seanad to give the Bill a Second Reading.