DOCSLIB.ORG

Against Home Rule 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Against Home Rule 1 Against Home Rule 1 Part I. of the National Insurance Act, about £50,000 in Part II., and about £100,000 for cost of administration of Against Home Rule The Project Gutenberg EBook of Against Home Rule (1912), by Various This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net Title: Against Home Rule (1912) The Case for the Union Author: Various Editor: S. Rosenbaum Release Date: March 24, 2005 [EBook #15450] Language: English Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK AGAINST HOME RULE (1912) *** Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Charles Aldarondo and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net. AGAINST HOME RULE Against Home Rule 2 THE CASE FOR THE UNION BY ARTHUR J. BALFOUR, M.P.; J. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN, M.P.; WALTER LONG, M.P.; GEORGE WYNDHAM, M.P.; LORD CHARLES BERESFORD, M.P.; J.H. CAMPBELL, K.C., M.P.; GERALD W. BALFOUR; THOMAS SINCLAIR; MARQUIS OF LONDONDERRY; EARL PERCY; L.S. AMERY, M.P.; GEORGE CAVE, K.C., M.P.; GODFREY LOCKER LAMPSON, M.P., &c. WITH INTRODUCTION BY SIR EDWARD CARSON, K.C., M.P. AND PREFACE BY A. BONAR LAW, M.P. EDITED BY S. ROSENBAUM LONDON FREDERICK WARNE & CO, AND NEW YORK 1912 IRISH ESSAYS COMMITTEE Chairman. THE RT. HON. SIR EDWARD CARSON, M.P. Vice-Chairman. GODFREY LOCKER LAMPSON, M.P. Committee. L.S. AMERY, M.P. GEORGE CAVE, K.C., M.P. THE RT. HON. J.H. CAMPBELL, K.C., M.P. A.L. HORNER, K.C., M.P. A.D. STEEL-MAITLAND, M.P. A.W. SAMUELS, K.C. P. CAMBRAY Secretary & Editor. S. ROSENBAUM, M.SC., F.S.S. PREFACE BY THE RIGHT HON. A. BONAR LAW, M.P. This book, for which I have been asked to write a short preface, presents the case against Home Rule for Ireland. The articles are written by men who not only have a complete grasp of the subjects upon which they write, but who in most cases, from their past experience and from their personal influence, are well entitled to outline the Irish policy of the Unionist Party. Ours is not merely a policy of hostility to Home Rule, but it is, as it has always been, a constructive policy for the regeneration of Ireland. We are opposed to Home Rule because, in our belief, it would seriously weaken our national position; because it would put a stop to the remarkable increase of prosperity in Ireland which has resulted from the Land Purchase Act; and because it would inflict intolerable injustice on the minority in Ireland, who believe that under a Government controlled by the men who dominate the United Irish League neither their civil nor their religious liberty would be safe. To create within the United Kingdom a separate Parliament with an Executive Government responsible to that Parliament would at the best mean a danger of friction. But if we were ever engaged in a great war, and the men who controlled the Irish Government took the view in regard to that war which was taken by the same men in regard to the Boer War; if they thought the war unjust, and if, as under the last Home Rule Bill they would have the right to do, they passed resolutions in the Irish Parliament in condemnation of the war, and even sent embassies carrying messages of good-will to our enemy, then this second Government at the heart Against Home Rule 3 of the Empire would be a source of weakness which might be fatal to us. The ameliorative measures originated by Mr. Balfour when he was Chief Secretary, and which culminated in the Wyndham Purchase Act, have created a new Ireland. Mr. Redmond, speaking a year or two ago, said that Ireland "was studded with the beautiful and happy homes of an emancipated peasantry." It is a true picture, but it is a picture of the result of Unionist policy in Ireland, a policy which Mr. Redmond and his friends, including the present Government, have done their best to hamper. The driving power of the agitation for Home Rule has always been discontent with the land system of Ireland, and just in proportion as land purchase has extended, the demand for Home Rule has died down. The Nationalist leaders, realising this, and regarding political agitation as their first object, have compelled the Government to put insurmountable obstacles in the way of land purchase--not because it had not been successful, but because it had been too successful. The prosperity and the peace of Ireland depend upon the completion of land purchase, and it can only be completed by the use of British credit, which in my belief can and ought only to be freely given so long as Ireland is in complete union with the rest of the United Kingdom. In the present deplorable position of British credit the financing of land purchase would be difficult; but it is not unreasonable to hope that the return to power of a Government which would adopt sane financial methods would restore our credit; and in any case, the object is of such vital importance that, whatever the difficulties, it must be our policy to complete with the utmost possible rapidity the system of land purchase in Ireland. It will also be our aim to help to the utmost, in the manner suggested in different articles in this book, in the development of the resources of Ireland. The Nationalist policy, which is imposed also on the Radical Party, is in fact more politics and less industry. Our policy is more industry and less politics. The strongest objection, however, and, in my opinion, the insurmountable obstacle to Home Rule, is the injustice of attempting to impose it against their will upon the Unionists of Ulster. The only intelligible ground upon which Home Rule can now be defended is the nationality of Ireland. But Ireland is not a nation; it is two nations. It is two nations separated from each other by lines of cleavage which cut far deeper than those which separate Great Britain from Ireland as a whole. Every argument which can be adduced in favour of separate treatment for the Irish Nationalist minority as against the majority of the United Kingdom, applies with far greater force in favour of separate treatment for the Unionists of Ulster as against the majority of Ireland. To the majority in Ireland Home Rule may seem to be a blessing, but to the minority it appears as an intolerable curse. Their hostility to it is quite as strong as that which was felt by many of the Catholics of Ireland to Grattan's Parliament. They, too, would say, as the Catholic Bishop of Waterford said at the time of the Union, that they "would prefer a Union with the Beys and Mamelukes of Egypt to the iron rod of the Mamelukes of Ireland." The minority which holds this view is important in numbers, for it comprises at the lowest estimate more than a fourth of the population of Ireland. From every other point of view it is still more important, for probably the minority pays at least half the taxes and does half the trade of Ireland. The influence and also the power of the minority is enormously increased by the way in which its numbers are concentrated in Belfast and the surrounding counties. The men who compose this minority ask no special privilege. They demand only--and they will not demand in vain--that they should not be deprived against their will of the protection of British law and of the rights of British citizenship. CONTENTS. Against Home Rule 4 PREFACE By the Rt. Hon. A. Bonar Law, M.P. INTRODUCTION By the Rt. Hon. Sir Edward Carson, K.C., M.P. HISTORICAL I. A NOTE ON HOME RULE By the Rt. Hon. A.J. Balfour, M.P. II. HISTORICAL RETROSPECT By J.R. Fisher CRITICAL III. THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION By George Cave, K.C., M.P. IV. HOME RULE FINANCE By the Rt. Hon. J. Austen Chamberlain, M.P. V. HOME RULE AND THE COLONIAL ANALOGY By L.S. Amery, M.P. VI. THE CONTROL OF JUDICIARY AND POLICE By the Rt. Hon. J.H. Campbell, K.C., M.P. VII. THE ULSTER QUESTION By the Marquis of Londonderry, K.G. VIII. THE POSITION OF ULSTER By the Rt. Hon. Thomas Sinclair. IX. THE SOUTHERN MINORITIES By Richard Bagwell, M.A. X. HOME RULE AND NAVAL DEFENCE By Admiral Lord Charles Beresford, M.P. Against Home Rule 5 XI. THE MILITARY DISADVANTAGES OF HOME RULE By the Earl Percy. XII. THE RELIGIOUS DIFFICULTY UNDER HOME RULE (i.) The Church View By the Rt. Rev. C.F. D'Arcy, Bishop of Down. (ii.) The Nonconformist View By Rev. Samuel Prenter, M.A., D.D. (Dublin). CONSTRUCTIVE XIII. UNIONIST POLICY IN RELATION TO RURAL DEVELOPMENT IN IRELAND By the Rt. Hon. Gerald Balfour. XIV. THE COMPLETION OF LAND PURCHASE By the Rt. Hon. George Wyndham, M.P. XV. POSSIBLE IRISH FINANCIAL REFORMS UNDER THE UNION By Arthur Warren Samuels, K.C. XVI. THE ECONOMICS OF SEPARATISM By L.S. Amery, M.P. XVII. PRIVATE BILL LEGISLATION By the Rt. Hon. Walter Long, M.P. XVIII. IRISH POOR LAW REFORM By John E. Healy, Editor of the "Irish Times." XIX. IRISH EDUCATION UNDER THE UNION By Godfrey Locker Lampson, M.P.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Can Home Rule in the District of Columbia Survive the Chadha Decision?
    Catholic University Law Review Volume 33 Issue 4 Summer 1984 Article 2 1984 Can Home Rule in the District of Columbia Survive the Chadha Decision? Bruce Comly French Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview Recommended Citation Bruce C. French, Can Home Rule in the District of Columbia Survive the Chadha Decision?, 33 Cath. U. L. Rev. 811 (1984). Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol33/iss4/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CAN HOME RULE IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SURVIVE THE CHADHA DECISION? Bruce Comly French* More than a decade has passed since the enactment of the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act (Home Rule Act).' In this Act, the Congress delegated much of its con- stitutional authority affecting the District of Columbia2 to an elected * Associate Professor of Law, Claude W. Pettit College of Law, Ohio Northern Uni- versity. Lecturer, Columbus School of Law, Catholic University of America. B.A., The American University, 1969; M.A., The American University, 1970; J.D., Antioch College School of Law, 1975. The author was Legislative Counsel to the Council of the District of Columbia (1979-1983) and Staff Director and Counsel to the Committee on Government Operations, Council of the District of Columbia (1975-1978). The author recognizes and appreciates the assistance of M.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy, Sovereignty and Unionist Political Thought During the Revolutionary Period in Ireland, C
    This is a repository copy of Democracy, Sovereignty and Unionist Political Thought during the Revolutionary Period in Ireland, c. 1912-1922. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/118211/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Reid, C.W. orcid.org/0000-0001-6252-6321 (2017) Democracy, Sovereignty and Unionist Political Thought during the Revolutionary Period in Ireland, c. 1912-1922. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 27. pp. 211-232. ISSN 0080-4401 https://doi.org/10.1017/S008044011700010X This article has been published in a revised form in Transactions of the Royal Historical Society [https://doi.org/10.1017/S008044011700010X]. This version is free to view and download for private research and study only. Not for re-distribution, re-sale or use in derivative works. © Royal Historical Society 2017. Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ DEMOCRACY, SOVEREIGNTY AND UNIONIST POLITICAL THOUGHT DURING THE REVOLUTIONARY PERIOD IN IRELAND, c.
    [Show full text]
  • De Búrca Rare Books
    De Búrca Rare Books A selection of fine, rare and important books and manuscripts Catalogue 141 Spring 2020 DE BÚRCA RARE BOOKS Cloonagashel, 27 Priory Drive, Blackrock, County Dublin. 01 288 2159 01 288 6960 CATALOGUE 141 Spring 2020 PLEASE NOTE 1. Please order by item number: Pennant is the code word for this catalogue which means: “Please forward from Catalogue 141: item/s ...”. 2. Payment strictly on receipt of books. 3. You may return any item found unsatisfactory, within seven days. 4. All items are in good condition, octavo, and cloth bound, unless otherwise stated. 5. Prices are net and in Euro. Other currencies are accepted. 6. Postage, insurance and packaging are extra. 7. All enquiries/orders will be answered. 8. We are open to visitors, preferably by appointment. 9. Our hours of business are: Mon. to Fri. 9 a.m.-5.30 p.m., Sat. 10 a.m.- 1 p.m. 10. As we are Specialists in Fine Books, Manuscripts and Maps relating to Ireland, we are always interested in acquiring same, and pay the best prices. 11. We accept: Visa and Mastercard. There is an administration charge of 2.5% on all credit cards. 12. All books etc. remain our property until paid for. 13. Text and images copyright © De Burca Rare Books. 14. All correspondence to 27 Priory Drive, Blackrock, County Dublin. Telephone (01) 288 2159. International + 353 1 288 2159 (01) 288 6960. International + 353 1 288 6960 Fax (01) 283 4080. International + 353 1 283 4080 e-mail [email protected] web site www.deburcararebooks.com COVER ILLUSTRATIONS: Our front and rear cover is illustrated from the magnificent item 331, Pennant's The British Zoology.
    [Show full text]
  • The Death and Funeral of Edward Carson
    The death and funeral of Edward Carson Edward Carson had contracted bronchial pneumonia in June 1935 but by July he was out of danger. During this period Dr Charles D’Arcy, the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland, paid a visit to see his fellow Dubliner. Carson confided to the Primate, ‘I have seen much to shake my faith and what remains with me is no more than I learned at my mother’s knee: “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son …”’. The Archbishop assured Ned, his old friend, that John 3:16 was ‘enough’. While Carson recovered, his health was nevertheless fatally weakened. By the early autumn his strength began to ebb away and at 8:00 on the morning of 22 October 1935 at Cleve Court, a Queen Anne house in the Isle of Thanet, Kent, Carson died. Carson had left no instructions in his will as to where he wished to be buried but in conversation with Lord Craigavon (as Sir James Craig had become in 1927) he had expressed a desire to be buried in the land, in Craigavon’s words, for which ‘he fought so long, so valiantly and so successfully’. In a broadcast the Prime Minister announced that the Northern Ireland Government would provide a state funeral and that Carson would be buried St Anne’s Cathedral. Craigavon introduced special legislation in the Northern Ireland House of Commons to enable the burial to take place in the Cathedral. The legislation passed through all its stages there and in the Senate in one sitting.
    [Show full text]
  • Ot Expected Naval Bill Famous Battle of 1912
    'VOLUME XIII. TWELVE PAGES LETHBRIDGE, ALBERTA, THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1920 TWELVE PAGES Nl'MBEli CANADA THREATENS TO Vote Against Miners'Strike DRAIN SCOTLAND "DRY" In Gt. Britain OT EXPECTED NAVAL BILL LONDON, March 11.—(By Canadian Preaa)—A special oorre«pond«nt of the Dally Graphic «ay« that the only way Scotland la likely td (Jo dry Is by Canada draining h»r of whiskey. A greatly increase^ area is being LONDON, March 11.—The sown with barley and the correspondent declares he has seen evidence special trade union congress, in the hands of a whiskey exporting firm that Canada is preparsd to take m w m mmm mmm w • • W mmt • a MV * Ml * • • • S B W * mere whiskey than Scotland can supply. in session here, voted over­ "Vancouver,"for Instance, has ba*n getting hundreds of cases a month whelmingly today against the from one firm alone and the cry lit 'Send us more," " says the corres­ pondent. strike policy, and in favor of According to the correspondent, a Scottish distiller scoffed at the continued efforts by constitu­ idea of prohibition in Scotland, adding: "Prohibition in Canada Is a fare* and we have a splendid market there tional means to effect the nat­ for more whiskey than we can spare." ionalization of mines. FAMOUS BATTLE OF 1912 New Irrigation District Act is Lethbridge Irrigationists Will' The vote against a general Members of House Reticent About Commenting on It Until Full of Contentious Points Be Heard on New Bill Now j strike came after Secretary- Copies of Jellicoe's Report Have Been Perused— For Legislature Before Legislature Hodges, of the miners' fed­ Western Farmers Members Inclined to Belief Navy Ulster Wins Under eration, moved a resolution Needed to Protect Canadian Trade Routes— GOVERNMENT STUMPED RECALL OF TRUSTEES in favor of direct action to Liberals Consider Report Vindication of ON "OWNER" DEFINITION MAY BE ELIMINATED compel nationalization.
    [Show full text]
  • A Global Comparison of Non-Sovereign Island Territories: the Search for ‘True Equality’
    Island Studies Journal, 15(1), 2020, 43-66 A global comparison of non-sovereign island territories: the search for ‘true equality’ Malcom Ferdinand CNRS, Paris, France [email protected] Gert Oostindie KITLV, the Netherlands Leiden University, the Netherlands [email protected] (corresponding author) Wouter Veenendaal KITLV, the Netherlands Leiden University, the Netherlands [email protected] Abstract: For a great majority of former colonies, the outcome of decolonization was independence. Yet scattered across the globe, remnants of former colonial empires are still non-sovereign as part of larger metropolitan states. There is little drive for independence in these territories, virtually all of which are small island nations, also known as sub-national island jurisdictions (SNIJs). Why do so many former colonial territories choose to remain non-sovereign? In this paper we attempt to answer this question by conducting a global comparative study of non-sovereign jurisdictions. We start off by analyzing their present economic, social and political conditions, after which we assess local levels of (dis)content with the contemporary political status, and their articulation in postcolonial politics. We find that levels of discontent and frustration covary with the particular demographic, socio- economic and historical-cultural conditions of individual territories. While significant independence movements can be observed in only two or three jurisdictions, in virtually all cases there is profound dissatisfaction and frustration with the contemporary non-sovereign arrangement and its outcomes. Instead of achieving independence, the territories’ real struggle nowadays is for obtaining ‘true equality’ with the metropolis, as well as recognition of their distinct cultural identities.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Abercorn Papers Adobe
    INTRODUCTION ABERCORN PAPERS November 2007 Abercorn Papers (D623) Table of Contents Summary ......................................................................................................................2 Family history................................................................................................................3 Title deeds and leases..................................................................................................5 Irish estate papers ........................................................................................................8 Irish estate and related correspondence.....................................................................11 Scottish papers (other than title deeds) ......................................................................14 English estate papers (other than title deeds).............................................................17 Miscellaneous, mainly seventeenth-century, family papers ........................................19 Correspondence and papers of the 6th Earl of Abercorn............................................20 Correspondence and papers of the Hon. Charles Hamilton........................................21 Papers and correspondence of Capt. the Hon. John Hamilton, R.N., his widow and their son, John James, the future 1st Marquess of Abercorn....................22 Political correspondence of the 1st Marquess of Abercorn.........................................23 Political and personal correspondence of the 1st Duke of Abercorn...........................26
    [Show full text]
  • Article the Empire Strikes Back: Brexit, the Irish Peace Process, and The
    ARTICLE THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK: BREXIT, THE IRISH PEACE PROCESS, AND THE LIMITATIONS OF LAW Kieran McEvoy, Anna Bryson, & Amanda Kramer* I. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................610 II. BREXIT, EMPIRE NOSTALGIA, AND THE PEACE PROCESS .......................................................................615 III. ANGLO-IRISH RELATIONS AND THE EUROPEAN UNION ...........................................................................624 IV. THE EU AND THE NORTHERN IRELAND PEACE PROCESS .......................................................................633 V. BREXIT, POLITICAL RELATIONSHIPS AND IDENTITY POLITICS IN NORTHERN IRELAND ....637 VI. BREXIT AND THE “MAINSTREAMING” OF IRISH REUNIFICATION .........................................................643 VII. BREXIT, POLITICAL VIOLENCE AND THE GOVERNANCE OF SECURITY ..................................646 VIII. CONCLUSION: BREXIT AND THE LIMITATIONS OF LAW ...............................................................................657 * The Authors are respectively Professor of Law and Transitional Justice, Senior Lecturer and Lecturer in Law, Queens University Belfast. We would like to acknowledge the comments and advice of a number of colleagues including Colin Harvey, Brian Gormally, Daniel Holder, Rory O’Connell, Gordon Anthony, John Morison, and Chris McCrudden. We would like to thank Alina Utrata, Kevin Hearty, Ashleigh McFeeters, and Órlaith McEvoy for their research assistance. As is detailed below, we would also like to thank the Economic
    [Show full text]
  • Disraeli and Gladstone: Opposing Forces by Robert Blake
    Disraeli and Gladstone: Opposing Forces By Robert Blake Disraeli and Gladstone were both politicians of extraordinary ability - but their personalities clashed and they heartily loathed each other. Robert Blake, the British constitutional historian, compares their political careers, and charts their stormy relationship. Mutual dislike In the general election of 1 April 1880, the Conservative party under Benjamin Disraeli was crushingly defeated by the Liberals (known as Whigs) - under William Gladstone. Lord Granville, a moderate Whig, wrote to Queen Victoria who would, he knew, be bitterly disappointed by the decision of the electorate: 'Lord Beaconsfield [Disraeli] and Mr Gladstone are men of extraordinary ability; they dislike each other more than is usual among public men. Of no other politician Lord Beaconsfield would have said in public that his conduct was worse than those who had committed the Bulgarian atrocities. He has the power of saying in two words that which drives a person of Mr Gladstone's peculiar temperament into a state of great excitement.' There is no doubt that the two statesmen hated each other. There is no doubt that the two statesmen hated each other. Disraeli referred to his rival in a letter to Lord Derby as '...that unprincipled maniac Gladstone - extraordinary mixture of envy, vindictiveness, hypocrisy and superstition'. And Gladstone more moderately said of his old enemy, 'the Tory party had principles by which it would and did stand for bad and for good. All this Dizzy destroyed'. When Lord Granville wrote to Queen Victoria, Disraeli, born in 1804, had one more year to live; Gladstone, who was born in 1810, had another eighteen.
    [Show full text]
  • The Home Rule Question
    Réussir l’agrégation d’anglais The Home Rule The Home Rule Question (1870-1914) Pauline Collombier-Lakeman Collombier-Lakeman Pauline Question Home Rule became a significant issue from the 1870s across the British Isles. Aspirations to limited legislative autonomy were notably strong in Ireland, where a Home Rule party progressively emerged and played a major role both on the island and at Westminster. While the question of Irish Home Rule came to dominate discussions, the quest for self- (1870-1914) government was not limited to Ireland but soon spread to other parts of the United Kingdom. In Scotland and Wales, Home Rule movements were also formed with their (1870-1914) own specific objectives. This led to exchanges on the idea of “home rule all round”. On Pauline Collombier-Lakeman a broader scale, Home Rule spurred cross-imperial solidarities and raised the question of the future of the British Empire and the possibility of an “imperial federation”. And although it aroused keen interest and support across Britain and the rest of the Empire, it also provoked intense opposition in the shape of loyalism or unionism. In doing so, Home Rule reshaped British politics along new lines. Pauline Collombier-Lakeman is a Senior Lecturer in British Studies at the university of Strasbourg. After studying at the ENS Fontenay-Saint- Cloud and passing the Agrégation, she was awarded her PhD from the Université Paris 3 – Sorbonne Nouvelle in 2007. Her research work has been focusing on Irish parliamentary nationalism and the relationship between Irish Home Rulers and the British Empire. CET OUVRAGE EST LE FRUIT D’UNE ÉTROITE COOPÉRATION ENTRE BELIN ÉDUCATION ET LE CENTRE NATIONAL D’ENSEIGNEMENT À DISTANCE, ÉTABLISSEMENT PUBLIC QUI DISPENSE Question The Home Rule DES FORMATIONS DE TOUS NIVEAUX À PLUS DE 320 000 INSCRITS RÉPARTIS DANS LE JO MONDE ENTIER.
    [Show full text]
  • Members of Parliament Disqualified Since 1900 This Document Provides Information About Members of Parliament Who Have Been Disqu
    Members of Parliament Disqualified since 1900 This document provides information about Members of Parliament who have been disqualified since 1900. It is impossible to provide an entirely exhaustive list, as in many cases, the disqualification of a Member is not directly recorded in the Journal. For example, in the case of Members being appointed 5 to an office of profit under the Crown, it has only recently become practice to record the appointment of a Member to such an office in the Journal. Prior to this, disqualification can only be inferred from the writ moved for the resulting by-election. It is possible that in some circumstances, an election could have occurred before the writ was moved, in which case there would be no record from which to infer the disqualification, however this is likely to have been a rare occurrence. This list is based on 10 the writs issued following disqualification and the reason given, such as appointments to an office of profit under the Crown; appointments to judicial office; election court rulings and expulsion. Appointment of a Member to an office of profit under the Crown in the Chiltern Hundreds or the Manor of Northstead is a device used to allow Members to resign their seats, as it is not possible to simply resign as a Member of Parliament, once elected. This is by far the most common means of 15 disqualification. There are a number of Members disqualified in the early part of the twentieth century for taking up Ministerial Office. Until the passage of the Re-Election of Ministers Act 1919, Members appointed to Ministerial Offices were disqualified and had to seek re-election.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin & Devolution of Local Revenue Authority
    WCM129 guts.qk4 5/7/03 11:15 AM Page 20 The Origin & Devolution of Local Revenue Authority by Michael Coleman and Michael G. Colantuono s the population grows, new technology develops, the economy evolves, But local governments in California do not have adequate control of their new needs and priorities rise and old ones fade. The varied circumstances finances and local affairs. Over the last half-century — and especially since the that arise from these factors, over time and among different localities, are an essential adoption of Proposition 13 in 1978 — reason that control of municipal affairs and finance has always been a paramount con- California cities and counties have lost substantial control of their major fiscal cern of local governments. To respond efficiently and effectively to the needs of their resources to fund police and other law enforcement services, fire protection, customers, cities need the flexibility to change their services; they need control of their parks, libraries, schools, hospitals and public health. finances so revenues will cover costs and so they may reallocate resources to meet Today, California’s city budgets face changing priorities. greater risk and less stability, both eco- nomically and politically, than in the past. City revenues often don’t grow commensurately with service needs, which forces increases in taxes or fees or cuts in services. Moreover, unfunded Michael Coleman is principal of Coleman Advisory Services and fiscal consultant to the League. He mandates from state and federal govern- is the owner of CaliforniaCityFinance.com, an information resource on California local government ments and new judicial interpretations finance.
    [Show full text]