1 - Enoch Powell - The archived speeches

The Speeches of JohnEnoch PowellPOLL 4/1/10Speeches, March-December 1974, 4filesPOLL 4/1/10 File 3, March-April 1974Image 'IC The Litercuy Executors of the late Rt. Hon. J. Enoch Powell& content c the copyright owner. 2011.

_In princ iple, to coerce, or exerc ise srve Manceover those who render nox ions the env ronTle ntwh Loh the community lives, or who iyarvey cox iousq-7,bstances to their fellows , even 1:t:en the purveyanceis a voluntary trnsact ton bPt-Yeen thPind iv idualsconcerned'.Cbserve, hov,:ever, that the ter,:it 'nox binscovers an extremely 7-,roa:1 b-::nd of aeaafrig, exten.iin-ffrom strychnine to tobacco ad that it 7:Tort scons iderat ions both of dezree anf of c irstance,s ince 3loost any :71bstance is cap.::77:le mier ivPocond it ions, of procluc ha=f7_1.1 effccts. Polit icaldebte has for rflny yers, fri th is country codelsewhere, been explorin thP Lib,rripthln coplexities underl:,rin thPpropos it ion that the c it izen sho-:,'H be rest c inedfrom purveyir.IE riaxior =bet ancec to bia fellowa:the c.:1.1est ion "-;,:L7..t Is har?" can pcove In prct icee ither wnanc Prie ith precis ion or I iabtobe differently answered in ifferent states af1,:tiovlede. biress thE ,:arnin7 crn 1.7e ci7ette

e it her directly or throuFh their environmenttherefore [-.)ens up a potentially vac,t -f"en_Li ofpoifticilact ion. The JifLaolties ho-ever are adnothin7 to the explos ive rate et wn ch. co-nc ionfy..ftlt iplies if for the orev-nt ico nr rft3 ros7fDst itted the promot ion of benefit. 3toe a7lactivity a irns benr'..f't of 3 oae 1,:ind or other,and since .1.ach of that bone:fit nan be reiatad tothe indiv Et '111oneto that v raoolly ,aniir:ited concept, 'the env ironitfoilovs t'rit the Scope of cosrc iontheoret Lcally ha extende,.1 to co inicide 7tif± theEr3ater part of tbo life, '3 ct dec hs ions ofe the aobero _L the co ity.Let71:7-:'teikethe state res pone for nrp,•ient in.c7 th4-a le of fop f'o n. nr.1.7:::lipt .!_o t scL,..n_se de,ath or illnessalre .,1..-Hc_...7.ssed) the „iefinition tirnsrefic ct ion to be "fLiz a ler"t a ttrstirht rarTears. 74- n t-the 7 t e ''.1:7; 170 I e

qliality of food sold het her froT:fre:-11 T,ny ot her oo int of v Cbv':l foc,i_every possIble as ..ect, not only t'ne diettis relevant to health; bat 7anfort:;-.ely thenot ton of i::provernent ' or 1 i ng better, Tr, sthe not Ion of the 4 cood' . resoon ity forirnp.. 7 I. ng 1i-111)11es - nay, it a te - pr torrespcns flo ity for ,:ieter-:-.Lini.ng is good, forestbitr h rid cztr2.ndnrd a Inot Loh iiioro',..7e':-entlc to be -71eas7.1red and 1,herent“...::)er of .L„ s 1,7 ealternat ive standards e-z. ilch-re tobe prefer L'ed, 1-,-2L -Y hat t hey re.re o-oe ct Lvelv to to t-77_en Loto L;.ccorant.These c ions r he rth t, ed it e are • • -Lc 1-1 they ar'. re:3 tl-iot ofnut r -LCD.; inter-_,ot e ev er-c- herefHeT1 e d 7 .•D o ice1 y 7. ee - C7- 77 other t 7:3 b1 71- -IT beol-intar fly 19 t:TT, foo,d 17;7 er

nutrit ional value; but other thinEs ,==verare eclual. 7ot c1y :71ay the nuit f it 7ve foolbe less attract ive in other respects thetek theal ternat iv es but ituy be mo re exeiens ; ndir th,;t case the choice - or persuasion or co2ipiulc,ion - to or.-fer the .11ore nut r it ire foodnecessarily diverts cons.r...pt ion :en ro -Lc,47;alzay from other stIsf.:;ct ions. This Ls equallytrue on theiniscule scule of the.444..V a sindiv idual' :budget 1s-1(1:applied to an etre econor7y.77117,11 the poer 7;:-hich f Ixee certain standards and:ves preference to cert.tn s-ot ions ile f,--)oH of• hij-1 nutr it ionl thc1-Jo-ver to 1.tor other standard:7_ an:: lcer otherpreferences. i-, the TIore sbecause that pol:rer le one 7,-h ich cannot beexerc seJ the 1hht of all the consee•iences.:Tor exa,.4le acce-otance of state respons lityfor i = 07 to the7 Llty cf food osos .:Iccetanceof the f:rctble depression of other, 1bettunii,ent if Led a _i.ects of the otan,leard of life.not '.o Ic.no- • ht hos be en fo ..)ne

- l o -indiv idual or by the co=unity beca7a se a chEaperbt less natr it 1_01.1..7. diet was ruled out .The apparently nr1-ural 1stexten,-; ion of public respons ibillty froa, theprevent Lon of :r.arrn -to the ri-root ion of good istirAs seen to be fra7...IP ht fth Lrfl.:11Pnge rot iraltheoretical, conse:.)..ence....; and this isnone the less so for the fci: that the boundaryline bet,....reen the to re:nonsh1tes carz-..3t 1.-)eun,..tbiLaolisly dr:3:7n. Th-. re is zt -world ofdifference between forbiddin;7, po isonous 1_-)reservn i.v esand fixinc a miniEu ft content ofCne .3f the p.,:pers i to this Con.7res thPone on "the 1.:sasrArement 7.-:os-citaltouched ,Apon t!-:rat inherently intractable coriondruyriof all public responsibility for health_ care,whet her ortoe 31' p -:ent - t].fleas'7,reLer-lt . The reiL::on for t:.Lsnot at 111 tliat :totstol PtIrDtis ,3reiufftciooty refined. The re SO n rIcta t 111 it is fa n.dai::-Le nt a . '1.'he ne it her is ncYr.to.11-ly hut a ni ty thene

def 's_nit ion of ,Jhat it is that is behealth sPrv ice 1..,z not a %/tell nary service, becuseanimal health is a clears to a human end ,..'hereashuman health is not means to a hurlan erld. Therequirements pl.aced upon the care ..Jnd brer=din7 ofcattle will vary accordino to the cler:E,and,• cf themarket; but the r::easi.rLr:bility of those denandsprov ides a bas is for the ::leasurenient of the octputsof vetrinary ca-e.for the ineasure-rient of benefit In .9nyhealth care.This problem of ,definit the.:_n.117.7'.L.,:i,..7;21s and soc :Lesapolopy for yo7.kroAo,on pilit to l s::stecr.s ha. eneral ar:J.'Iicie3 a -p..rt rAust t7)..rn - r ethat my topic Ig thP -po7 io.'L.1aest tr r2f thescr.)17: t -77,c tn7.:1de t t h7:1V 3 stretche,..J.4 oportei(1see e re 0001 ier4.c-f 0,7.7.7?

—rs ihltehe:aqe s concern t he oont'n of radioLind te1erts ton pro,iT,orarines)3orr:le polit syste:rs vest in a'ithor ityforeknowleW:e, or rnther predete:Tiint ton,vrhat is to he the content of 'the good', .andt hereby secT.:Irel the t neoret "cal fo,..indat for ti-1-6',1nrestricted exerc ise of coerciori 7-7ether pollt tcol '37-steris renoT.Ince _ poss 1.5.1efore r1ede or redete P.:toot ".on rif reez-4'therefore so const t7)u„.3.13 the explorat ion of al t err-1.dt :'_ve 1.:oss i.ilt,4-1,bject fo,r reconcthe oesolt , thatthe ho=is o: the prac'L Lcable. The stnot, of 000ro , aT)sol,:ste. sry-ste:-v cbo ic 'f-]se 1,2,7i_ndL7,' 131 def ,of 'the „:,yr.)od'nc e ocerc':.on HI::11..citez l_stence soc i.ety itself/sor!, pree'. Ionoit horttiYi'e„:17—init„ :70r,ze-,!torv e f

the altert lye sy.stem. The more, hovever,systeT1 alooroxia--ites to the second theoret cl cse,the more limited rJ the .':71ore exlicttlyarbitrary and tentat tve l ast-ript ion toa,,..ithori_ty of the .ranct 'on of de f LnIng 'the sjood'I shall ret rn to th 13s int of arbitroptentat ive deflolt ion in the 1.qtter pl-rt of7,:hat Ihave to say; 1-1t the v itl1_7(c)ort:since for thefatare of hunanity itself if s open aspossible the d f in i t ion of 'the c7ood' is -arlassa7Ipt ion probably as compelling -.c; yoa sit istome:It is convehient Fie, ot this .:Doint todrav attent fon to a bcrd: line PichPs jastbeen breached, :tr;±7.i.ably for the f irst tle!:,islat ioh see'±s likely t 3 be ciTvelyb;-'ttl.e-front in comin yoarc. and 7,'hich is mcinlto the ef ion on llocit !on of 'responsibility'for . refE.'rrod earlier "the rInolet t peri;ohal lihrty as nnt inc1T1..de7 17.to injare ,others'. .,Tlicat Ion it

the 'liberty to injure oneself, or 7ose crilfinjury, inchidin:- darier to life, health.Hence the assertion th':,t, th3,a2!lt r.oeos .:nentisindloid'aal and na on.e eiselouht i b resnonsiblfor his o';:n he'ilth. Ion. not oing to bother -!iththe diffictilties, 1J.hich are practi_cal rather th7ntheoretical diffillties, of the definttion of theLerns init nd 'cr=on blmec5with the 1_11-ti ,Dnq of deny-4-k p nr-,that Is, of transferrn7 .t) others,-3nd in4the state)the responsibility for the personLJhealth of the .1-1dvid71. se) far 7,s ratennger the helth ,Jf Dthrs.cjne is str':.ck at once 1-, ythe meanine extenzion :71,1efitr tL]e'ihjurin:i others'. 7o n-an conseTi-ntlythat 1-1:-10:),en'7 toaffects, to Ereater or less fell01, s:4orthree's'elffern r,ffects their hap7ines5 oedJoi aponthtr effsorts and thcirhelth rfcn t,e 2,-..Itint:ty and 1-aaly ' hs

— 15 —124 /544.1-7C-kt, it"-fi the total of goond serv ices voi1sb1efor ey.ch-Inge flu enjoyment . viien1y, therefre,if the meaning of ' injurin others .:1,.;en thewidest possible extens ion, the scope of indi.vrespons Lb Llity is reduced to zero) and a cocelling.:case is 7.1:4de for oolii. ited coerc ion overascects of indiv ij:)..;31 be h:.av iour tht cou.7 L:Iveeffect 7.apon the indiv phys 1.ca1 nrment.1 . Lhis no thearet ical soliloTry.Parlia!:nent has recently, ith b.r-i rely t forralityof .a debate ke it a or ine for ther 7L.de of=tor bicycle not tc wear a crash helziet. Thesole poss ibl,o offect of veoinr 2rash holset sto redace the r isk 927 inj7zry tc.: the o rer bioelf :it cannot be dined risk o- to: .",ny otherperson is affected,directly or r,:iirectly.et.‘t4-4+& clearita poss ble/exarripl,:‘ of the s:ns IityLof t he Lndi v id72La I for h n,7drawn: the aCt 07 Cvrh!_ss !.on ho 7-2e,=. florrc)tent a f.led Ipon the tod,_7 '1,1 by others4 - 1.-", ^-*^apcl 17;nce,,, nor :Joes 7.:t. a 1,1

-or the 2isk of injury upon others as f.t r:iht(_for instance, if it innrese(d the chances Ofaccicien then hs the 1 been jcIsti.ed?g ext,-..no ion to the soc f injuryIIothers.injury to others has been extenjer7 to me2nth4= mental, ITIoral and.. econciic conseniencesfor tbe f3mi1y, friends etc. of person ,.-hosedeTzth or Lnjary been Li.,„?oije,d or'.3shhelmet secondlyjthe trersineffort 'A.nd y.esoarces fcc other P'1, 17 0 sec to theJ.re th;e: Ir'ereOrl Tib1- nju re r-1t rdlythe divat ion of the ,co:.:Inanity ciDf the 0the person.77) obc Lorisht'If these erit coo t ieco,ncet inury to 0the , ,reas.pects of the indivin lifecoal h ve cj -crin7: urihir ph:ysfitness h.,.:ve b=r o 2e :e Por lril1Lty-nyoense h t

at its d Lsposal. t 1 itsociety, ey.ertin7 i . Jted ol . n7er thetotality of th fnJvLJua1s coo ricbe,c1:c. to the vete:: it .If so far nly t he t in ie st tipDf th s cc,ntof co e ion s been E re J., this is be:(: s eexplo rat -Ion Hs only j7.1.st be n '07.11= t e 77e s notheoret Lc1 rier bol.:7,:-een the cest rithee -nior . Cnce th rriopi s accepted ridtheprecedentsill be 2,3 - ;1 u:12-1Te de dThe ern ,t ftie t Ttershch i.f thef..-hd 1,1-17hs f:1 Lty r ,a 1 t sC. ts bt... direct, ,f t ires ry Lc s.;:r fers E: I . The s sLeh f LA.11 t s i 1.: 5._ e b e 27--.7 1-71' .•1

tc nc771de respons ibi7 ity for L,c:1,11 iroons iders to be the necessary :'ei-wh7:teverct r.f7tThe co 71al7,c, ry prov 1 s ion cf t h =it 1 ofm::t ion 77the state I even 7-hen the in,':17inpersonally free not torepreent sC deroat ion frcch12.-Iself ofitthP injtviJoi10resons ibility est-bl ishe.S the orempt on ofa d'aty on h is prt to uitzeco-rforT, -'ththe Lnfo rr:.at ion thus pr,7)7 ied. HA-7th ed-,czt .'Loncublso exiiense and directed (77_L'Ich more ser tc7-AF. Jfcitiesits Ln7,ocent ap:2e -:rancecprinc iplei•cral.se s th=i7e I:hs izecal -an_ net feJ.Jrej cof c7ereha;,..2: tz t ht an Sr tcr Ist trenche:i -_-1pon the 7i-0:It:ti 1.:s.„lec ::.3.3-1.e3 the.That tied a:h.: on h lc::: the f'.it'are ic,cC e. tro1.21.:7this th-,t-

.,II-,II,..rIC ,r 4cAIC4 ,,',. I4"4.„)4 .."'.1''',...1(1'C.,1C-.1C'Q.).r.I.), ,.'11i ..;0P- iCr- t....,f)-- I4-400)C )-,r-4) I0....1.,-- 471-I.-'( .)4,.1)r.;,,,4 •r -1rr.C.'1)(-',00CI(1),,,).1.::.-02-:4.,( ;(3.14 r(11„)......)'1..;(--,';••4c AII"r ;4,4--,,C)t ,,)", 1..-1r- 14I4.4, I'1 1CI)...c....1+''1,0s .cC)r.--.1'''), 1)Z 4( r),.„Ar,C .1C.I.)c?..JCD-L..4.,c 4( )(a,, - +r-r

- 2C -he estabiLEbed, in .ch theElay he testel.to s:est .E:o:r.e such prfnc t. t.7....-1,Lrht he dedu.ced •t:he7.-Tehve been c.:,r1s. ider .If collect:Lye rEs:ons t.c) protect,then 4. •coerclOn L Llrr riC C nfar anee a pro:. Lt a. "t. hou Tihalt4,5Euccess th2 pre7:=: nit Lori .7.2 rpc.)11-1t Inn(.).7e iron.nent : on ninio. hornot per Lssibli= 1nescrosse, notn t 47. 7:He. a:C., t e e .;."1 Z.lie 0 ss Lty the

•-.rHC:1,=..a "0 '''' i 4 ' ::•,:' 1 ' H it)1)(0 '....',, , - .- =.,' ,. t '..l ', •, A'4., ,.. '1 .(..: :, ' 4. o 4 ( , odI'''r =C. I I, 1)‘')( ''' '9 4. .1 .4 . 4.4.4r-4 ' 1 - AC .y 4 J 4 ', 4 ,n (1) ' 1 , (.10) cl . , ,sell, ,' ' — .4 ' . j„? I *- 'ri-FC ., k. I 4-` : i '' .1... 4 44 4 (4 ''') ''' 44444 S' 4 4 S,44 , 4 41, _T.', 4 s ..' . s,4k- ' "I r 1 ' 4.1 4 , "4- li ''''r....1r 4( 44), ,•• „ 4-4,10 1 ,,;-(T-,,11 C ) .,.) 1 r '''' -I (- ) .i.‘_ ,,,: rr- ; C.)... 't r( -e...s...,....'4 ' ,,sq4 , ; ,.,, ,G 1...., ' ,14C' 4(I,c ."" r' '4 .:(r 4 ' 14)';.. r -I4 ''' r -;',. r )r' ' -1,-1—, ': 141) "" :.) : : S '14:4 .4 4, 4 1/4 ' 4" I-•,z,S 4 , ("3" ' - .,, - 1 rt. r , ,_ ..,-,' P.4 err I(I)I 1 ' .3 , , C- 4 ,r''''- I in ,-4) 4 4 r -I 1 , 4-4 -1,' 4 -' ti ' ,1 I '1-4 Ct 1 ti.: 0 ;1 4 Y ..t , . .4' - .41, 4. ' C... ' (4 ) ''' + ' I1' . ,() .. 1 , '4'",, ''l 1 '. )4 1;1 ...("'44 ' 4 4 >, '40 er ". '' )1 • (5) r" , ..-: , I )45,4 t -4 5 5 F ' 11) •4,...,4 ' 1' , 4..-4 , ), .--.,. 'i C- ti CP 'tt I (2 r 4 -4 4 t- 41....1 C't 1 k. 'A . ',1. ' 0 4 1 4. 4C.: ' / -4;4) • (, i ,0 .7 I) ' • od 4 '4 7 ,---144) '1 f 4'''t '(1..) ,J) ,,i 1_5 2 ' , , ., ' "1 il7' :I)e4) ( .) .1) ., 0 (1) 1 41 4 I .1,) .-4---,' .4 4 .S #1 ,..CI) C) 4, 4 r-*:- 41) r- Iu) I r 4 N (21 L4 .. 4'....! ,..-. .. .., 7. 4.) ..I.) (.1) , "., '.- ' .:..) .., C : >. -; ,.,., ‘, - • 4 , r.-4 '....4 C,) 14 ,!- I ' ; C .‘_, - i Cf-t 4...°, e , ‘ ' Hr -4 . , ), , 411.,ol ) tr ' 4 4I C..) (1 (-) 4 -) r. i4.1.,, -,"b4 rir 24 4-'• . 11) ,„C ' ,T-9...c 1 ..!'4 4 ' rt. ' t 4'11 - .....1 ; (1) ( ) O.) k., ' (.1.1 •,--4(1),C. ".:• I ,..., C.) S..4 -4 ' '. ' '. a 1 ,..) 45(2 4'3 : 4 s ) - i14,. ,IC . T.): , -r. , 41F-, .- ;4 ',It'- CI It IJ ) C , 1 . 1 ".'d 0.) C' 1 '..0 5 -,, C. ,, 4). 151 4 ' A r.:,('0 A 7 ." r( .'5' 4 -, r) .,.. ( 4 4') ,.s.-) C.:, . 4: " ,. >P, i '1 (E) 4 " c .) 0 C , ( ) C,. i ,-(j - 41 () i- 4 1 / 01 C, (4,4 ' 4 4 ,.45 (4) ,..", 4 ', U) ••• ' r 1'14 4- CP •(,)'rl C .: ••• 4 ' ) ,-. 4 •,4 4 1 -.1 ..) ...,, , .,..:4 ' 4 .: r ^ ° , -..' 4 44) 4 t) 141) *1 • 5SD '17.44 ,1.44 „C.:4 , '1 SO E.' ' 1 11) 1, 4. 4 ' 1/44',. -4 CI),i ,1) .,4)..... 44 4) .....c0 r^ I 45 4"-1 ., I (,. ,. 4, .1.4 .4 1 ' . '....,.4--- r 4 g I .. 4 -4 4 r-.1 I ',.., 1 541(-i (I) C) .4) C 0) -: .44 r 44 ) f', . 471H(. 4 441) .S 4,•-1 4") 44 1, 4.• 4 ' 4 "4-4r-s, ‘44)(' ) ' ' 4. C. 4...-) 4-4 I) ‘'...) .,-- I C.1 C.; :- -.. 4 s :, 4-r ' 4 .Il4.1,)',.,4 S

(,,4i4(I).r .)r ,,C,i)4(..)(1•.4."-0...(I),.`.,1 V)C) 41-o1-4,.::-IC.....: -:4, :r--1---4,--- ,....,,r--4 'c..1;IA'4'14- -, ''I7:',44(1 .r '4 1...)(,..",. : '`)(.4 4-I,4 , -4,',/KE;,„.(4.)1 . ;11 i;-> C'4 I")i),:...:';.4'i;-=. 10L', C.-::::,4,5-1(r):.-1CO 4QF4V 4,0r' ''...4; ).j.,g 111,:i ,)14.4)(r)-'1');3)!Z.;L....44c I.-.. ./ ^r-II') 4F-4..) ,C.)0414-1., ,J)I4-4'.II.)'..011lri•4 ,CU ro`;‘, -,:44c r%,.44.-0C(;-)C. ,.1()C.'; ...(2,..:1 ;.f. t'lV r 4,..)4' I0 .A."044 ,4-I-.' - -.:r--I 4'..;).0-- r.)r 4(IICI.)(i. 47'(..4 -41.11,,n_r.:,rly,J1 4.,L;;4'r 'r---I.4 '.C4 '1.-.! ID4,'"„)•4- q„,,.:14 (D CI)_', , it " . ..C. 1 ..! .,rc S 4 -V; 44--'I,1).`1...,e C.10r--4.4.C4-440 4.7:'7144C.)::-.(I) 4 • 4.1c ..a)ci.)' .S.DCOr C.)- -'0:I)'s2 iI 'ri.,);-- 4,I. ).....(.) - 4f._.." 0.-- , 4 ' (.: (..';'1Lc)r- I0....41.4.1.1 c..(I.,4-,( 44 (,- .41..V',(0. '-(1..( ''.7-11.(1)I'..7.) . ,4.,....((4)I;-2,:-14.00-44 '•,- I0,ri....c:* '.,-1CCfi ,7- .)041.1-4 4.1---1!" '''ir C.)0;.) Arr2..1 )'I-', '(C()r. (...•1: :-.1CD(. ,iCO 00C)f LIS.).r..... 1-4--I-I()_:_ ..',..,, -1C.)4''.Ini.' - ) .S:' 1 --.1 . ,: )41111t'4,1 .4-.'; ' (.''. i• ; r 4r • ' (12) , 1.;), .,,11) cr,11)-,7.';1''''-lI.-; (.)(CVI'41 r--4(I)(1,)".-- 4--, IA ;.4•144 ,I)ci;.- -(II-t-4C; 4'Cri 11)(4Il)yi..L :;44; tP1C A.. ) ..".;.:LIV)4,4.1'I- 4"J.1;4 I/1,.> !....`. - A,-;4 c A 21I..) '-.4,1'1.1."3I:744-,44 -1a) 4C.)(44 r.-4'' 41..C.II 104 4 Ac.:: ,()4 C4 iS7:4 ,a)..'4= `41-,...r. -r.,--, 1 .A ;11C.4' ' -.I . l ',... ,..')' 1;'-' , 4)ti -4 -IC.) (`'4...., 05 ,4i)r' 1 ' C. i ..,` ' 1.4( ' r 4.1% . -.I''''")14 ..: 4L-:, *4';''4 - 4 ; 'r .S.: 4 ' 4 ' i''. .:1)t)0 4.1) 1r, r1) 0 + :r --I" 1 0.:;., 4,, (4'..1 ..--, : ,i) r , s...10 ;.-4 '•r-44) - "4 ' , )..., , 1 , ri ' 4 4r I4 '5-:r, 4 4; ;; ..:,41:1'1 1') ( ) `,". ,i' - —; r-4Il r . , I . 4 .......,'.4 ,-,'1.:(3.) .4 , CIr 1C 1::./(- 41-,-1''Ar 1

and coanteir-arche of the it th-IrtyMts. f.Irstiriciple is clecely tesecond, th,-,t 1:n.q.blic policy be s ctlysep.arated possible frtim agency. an -.1rb.civ isa-t ion the sa..2ttary (-)f life isfro.:1-1 the health safety of thembe the ; ccre ::.Tons t fact ir:Irj)7 tes, 7.7eF1 riOtlead _directly :_;2 Is cor,-.t pro7.7 is ic eLic. er_,7!er"ces1.,fater,sevrerin,e1ei P rso spc sa 1. CI! t.het centthe indii-pens-a.ble Cr:Z.:Thi,C721177-1. the n..? ile id 1.shei .te, t. cess.LY.:77 ct. 'Hetar helit bcen., ••tt rurlser71 iv Ita, thc. t- t:attly reLt

'orovLsion cf.iuet bede by nublictt kxxxxxhouses an.C, :-Luclt be erectpby pub7ic ie.cy beca'..z.se t'_Tcy ,re re..1 'Ired c:otsafety.tPe trid-:rc1s 1'1 eni — 1.1-"" tie 7;71].i.Chlalready emined f2t 1Pr,th, nnen-iond t he use of t 1TE or are Ified to'(.H2e7ent clear and a L e zet he n'd a-it h of the 1 frot e cts CLLss Ions of ,o thers; .17-a t t t CH.", 7,leLs not ju:-? t flable for the 177 ose of e fr.) r7,7 el.'s -F* rt t e tf_oJi Liu 1 e 11 ft].F; o ntothers; o farther 17:na .Ic.1 t Ir., 1.re s ons 11 Lt. y for 1.] to own. a It h tAe e e r 7Iou s :eect effec srelot •Ith the r ot of the xct .'ot r s sto 17.7.:1_1.1„1:y t rPct

:and we71-bein of it: Eas..nbors or 4,..'neto the r.,..ndiv i_dualof hts personzi dec•Ls ions,Lncoalpab -role w 1:1.0 -toa tt .

:TOT FOR PUBLICATIONBEFORE TIME OF DELIVERYAddress by the Rt. Hon. J. Enoch Povell to theAnglo-American Press Association atiscr* de 11Amerique Latine, 217 Boulevarde StGermain, PARIS.1300 hirs, Thursday, 25 April, 1971+It has been the peculiar fate of the British, among all thenat tons of Europe and perhaps of the world, to be profoundly misundersteodby others and consequently, when the results of misunderstandingstrike home at last, to be denounced as perfidiousor fickle or contradictory. Nothing is further from my intent ionin saying this than to blame others. Indeed, the fault is in thefirst place cur own; for we take a peculiar delight in rnisunderstandingourselves and, even when we are not doing this, in• festering and tending the misapprehensions of others.2Thus it was, that, when last month the Foreign Secretaryannounced to Europe that the Brit ish people were preponderantlyaverse from membership of the European Economic Community, even inits present form, let alone as the embryo of' a future economic andpolitical unit, and moreover that they did not, and would not, considerthemselves bound by a fundamental act of state in which theyhad not participated, cries of amazement and anger broke out fromone end to another of the Cont inent .It is easy, too easy, for an Englishman to retort that theCont inent should have known better, and had been given everyopportunity to know better. If Cont inental observers had troubledto follow the debates in the Brit ish Parliament they would have 3known that the Government had repeatedly emphasized the unfetteredpower of the House of Commons to reverse and repeal what it wasde ing in pass ing the European Communit ies Bill, and that ministershad used this as their champion defence against the charge thatParliament was giving up its sovereignty, and had pat iently reiteratedthat a treaty of "indefinite duration" did not mean thesame as a "permanent" or "indissoluble" treaty. If the sameCont inental observers had gone about in Br ita in it self, t hey wouldhave learnt that at no time had even a bare majority among thepeople been in favour of British membership and that this aversion

- 2 - 4-was deep, widespread and growing. 7othing that has hanpened wasunforeseeable or unforeseen; anybody who knew Britain knew thatthat was how it would be. I can personally claim to have done myfrommodest best in 1971 and 1972, from Lyons to Brussels, and/Frankfurtte Turin, to provide the Community countries, in their own principaltengues, with a clear and (it turned out) accurate preview of whe::woeldhappen.However, it is not good enough simply to say that the press,the public and the governments of the Continental nations were idleand incurious, and therefore deserve the shock they have had. Onehas to ask why they were uninterested in such apparently significantfacts as that the British public preponderantly did not want tojoin the Community, that Her :lajesty's Opposit ion had fought ago instthe Government s legislat ion step by step, and that bitter polit icalopponents had sunk their differences to unite in this struggle.The reason why the Continental countries were not interested wasthe usual reason for people not being interested: they did notthink it mattered. So far as they could understand, it did notmatter what the major ity of the Brit ish public wanted, it did notmatter what the politicians were saying in Parliament or what thepont ical part ies were saying to the electorate. On the Cent inentthis was all very small beer. I recall the phrase of a Frenchman,whom in February 1971 I tried to warn how matters stood in Britain."But surely,' he replied, "the off ic ials w ill see that it happens?"Europe said to itself, in effect: we have the official statements- nay, the official acts - of the Brit ish government; why need webother our heads further?It is true that the British aress, which on this subject waswildly unrepresentat ive, did nothing to help; by sneer andsuppression the British newspapers encouraged European readers intheir mistaken belief. But it was a belief to ',Thich those readerswere already firmly predisposed. They were predisnosed to itbecause of the total ir.compat ibility between the pont ical experienceof their own countries and that of Brita in. The posit ion ofParliament in the British experience is something unknown and

•- 3 -therefore unintelligible on the Continent. In a monarchy with nodiv is ior. of flow e r s and no fundamental law, the British Parlia entis thF 7,cle guarantor of our nat ional cont inu ity, and of all thee ,tal rights and duties in our community. That Parliament1_ ever relinquish its powers to any other authority, internalco external, is as absurd and unthinkable to an Englishman as itwo-1ld be to an American to suggest that the 73nited States couldabolish its constitution.To say that Parliament has executed a permanent transfer ofits powers, which, by virtue cf a written document, it cannotrevoke, is, for a British hearer, to pronounce words withoutmeaning. The fact that European ministers and officials are so410 often to be heard saying just that, is a sign not so 7ach thatthey are lacking in tact as that they are unaware of t eand constitutional otherness cf the United Kingdom. There is nolack of purposes fcr which Britain would be willing to combine withone or all of her Continental neighbours; but the prov iso, so faras Britain is concerned, will always be that the control ofParliament over the adopt ion and execut ion of those purposesremains intact. The fact that the adherence of Britain to the RomeTreaty by the Treaty of Brussels 1,7 ill have to be revoked and refashioned- or, in the usual terminology, "renegotiated" - doesnot depend simply upon the political programme on which the presentBrit ish government came precariously to power. It is a fact thatcan be affirmed with certa inty because of the nature of the 7rit ish• state itself. 9The parliamentary independence and untrammelled selfgovernmentof Britain may be inconvenient for those bent uponconstructing new political edif ices; bat it is not something atwhich other nat ions, especially nat ions of the European continent,need look askance or jealously. In defending her own inst itut ionsand her own freedom, the island nat ion has more than once broughtsalvat ion to ethers through her insp irat ion and her actions; andthere is no assurance that these mav not be equally needed agaHowever that may be, when the 7.:rit ish people weigh the ir future,

- 4-10the greatest asset that they have is this rooted prejudice infavour cf their own freedom, internal and external.The Brit ish today are weighing that future anxiously. There,are many who, in the words of iged#4,&r's nymn, "beset them roundwith dismal stories". They are told their nation is too small inscale tc be viable in the modern world. They are told they areinferior in economic and commercial performance, and that theworld has left them further and further behind. They are told thattheir rump of a vanished empire is meaningless and indefensible.They are told that their people are undisciplined and feckless,the plebs Romana of modern times, intent only on bread andcircuses. How, if all that ,eere true, it would be amended byamalgamating them somehow with their superiors and reducing theifnat ion to a province of an artificial superstate, has never beenclearly expla ined. Certa inly such a prescr ipt ion would run counterto the general experience of mankind. However, fortunately, everyone of the "dismal stories" is false, the ugly offspring ofeconomic ignorance and political prejudice. Brita in as herselfhas no less a future in prospect in 1974 than she had in 1874,1774 or 1674.Greatness, for Britain at any rate, had never consisted, andnever will, in mere size, whether measured in physical or ineconomic terms. If that were the criterion, the largest states -in extent or populat ion, or product ion - would be the happiestand the most glorious; and that is something that has rarely ornever been observable. On the contrary, in both ancient and12modern times, some of the smallest countries have been in everyway the most eminent; and there is no sign cf this ceasing to betrue in our own day. What is special about Britain is that herinsularity and her oceanic aspect I combined with her s ingularsuccess in f inding forms cf government that minimize compuls ionand maximise tolerance and indiv idual choice, have ensured thatshe would net be t ied tc ene sphere of act iv ity or to one predictablenat ional role. The whole world is her horne, in a sense thatthis cannot be said cf any other nat ion; and as Pericles once

•cla imed of Athens, she has a natural versat ility which enables herto adapt herself to the great and unforeseen changes ,:rhich sweepthe globe. She is equipT)ed to ride them as if the island itselfwere a great shiThe last thirty years have been a triumphant demonstration ofmy theme. Otter nat ions in that period have been resurrected outof defeat and devastation, or have been remoulded by revolution..1,To other has passed through so fundamental a change of the worldin which she lived and still ma inta ined such cont inuity or prosperedso steadily as the United Kingdom.I said 'prospered', and I meant 'prospered' ; for the ap:earancesto the contrary are an illusion - fortunately a superficial 14.and transitory illusion - produced by policies which all have onething in common. Hot surprisingly, it is the thing most hostile toBrit ish genius. That thing is arbitrary constra int .I will guarantee to show that to this cause is to be tracedevery one of the episodes in the last thirty years that have beenwaved in the face of Britain and the world to prove that thevo icesBritish are incompetent failures. Today, for instance, the /aresaying that Br ita in has a huge defic it. It is not true. ThatBritain is bankrupt. It is not true. That Britain does not payher way in the world. It is not true. The not ion of a Britainwhich cannot afford the standard of living that her people havechosen and that they strive continually to bring closer to theirhearts' desire, is a monstrous figment, constructed to keep inplace a crazy system of monetary bureaucracy.The facade ought to be torn down. If I had my way, Her151,1ajesty's Government should not borrow, nor guarantee anybodyelse borrowing, another ha 'penny worth of fore ign currency: thewhole business is empty w indow-dress ing - we neither ga in by itnor need it. If I had my way, the British government should meetits expenditure in the const itut ional manner, with moneys grantedby Parliament, and not at all by inflating the currency, a processwhich the British people neither need nor gain by. If I had myway, there should be no let cr hindrance placed cn any, whether

6 - lbc it izen or stranger, who wished to send his money or valuablesri-.reer into Eritain or cut of Britain. What a shocking advertisectit is., t D to stop cash or capital leaving the country,fromTese Cezrtain to stop people escaping/the pcadiseof Ccouism ut merely is it unnecessary; it is positivelycounter-pro,-iuct ive - Britain ne ither needs it nor ga ins by it.The so-celled deficit on the balance of payments is a meredev ice for ma inta ining an art if ic ial exchange rate - maybe toohigh, maybe too low - by means of sham borrowing and sham lendingbetween governments. Internet ional payments will always balance;but the one and only healthy point of balance is that which isallowed to tell the nation and the world the truth. The paper- 17chase of inflat ion is a dishonesty of governments, which 7ripes offonto the people who are its innocent v ictims; it tco is a method- this t ime a domest ic method - of evading and concealing the truth.Finally, bcth ficticns have to be shored up and sustained by anedif ice of controls, always threatening to grow, never diminishing,which is used to deprive the citizen tilt e:,nly of his liberty butof his good conscience.We ought to strip away these pretences. We ought to reestablishhonest money and open exchange; and as we stand on ourown feet - whose else? - we ought to let it be plainly seen thatwe do so. The reality 1,.ould then appear - the reality cf a nat ionwhich, by the industry and character of its neople and the endowmentof its unique s ituat ion, needs no art ificial or external Ifsancort tc maintain standards of physical well-being and of socialharmony and polit ical maturity which challenge comparison withthose of any under the sun. It is a nation the opposite ofintrovert or isolationist : the very principle of its polit ical aswell as its commercial existence is to brook no limitat ion on thefreedom of its people to seek their advantage in any way and inany part of the world - which is onereason why it never will bebrought within the constraints of a continental syste, howeverflourishing. It is a nation whose citizens are as mach at homeacross the oceans as across the Channel - and often more so.

•19Filially, it is a nation which has not lost the capability ofclefen'q'aa its existence against the threat of force. In fact, fromthis •11.)ility the most distinctive marks of the British peopleas they have always done, to derive. This capability wesh.in1,1 cast away if our own defence were ever permanently amalgawatedith that of some great tract of the continental land mass.To say this is no more to counsel withdrawal into a delusion ofLasular :.;ecurity, than to repudiate a continental economic systemis tl take refuge in a dream of self-suffic iency. On the contrary,all inuce is, as it always has been, the essence of 79ritish defence;•;Ind :/o (.,o-untry has offered or expended more than Brita inforthe alliance which arose from across the Atlantic twenty-five 20years ago to prevent the balance of r,ower between _East and ,Test inEurope from be ing heedlessly destroyed.However, I do not stop there. I assert that the safety andiivi.eprau,i3nt strength of France remains a essent ial of Britishsecurity, as it has been these last hundred years, only less v italthan our own ability in the last resort to keep our islands inv tolatefrom an enemy and open to the resources of the other continents.It is totally unnatural that there is today no special link ofmutual defence between France and Br ita in, but rather the non-linkof France Is neculiar relat ionship to TT.A.T.O. s ince 1966. All theold jealousies and fears which kept the forces of France andBritain aloof in the past - jealousies and fears in Africa, in theFar East, in the Middle East, in the Mediterranean - all these have11110 been liquidated by the irreversible changes of the last thirtyyears. Nothing - certa inly nct M.A.T.O. certa inly not the E.E.O. -ought to stand in the way now of a comprehensive defensive understandingbetween Britain and France which 7?Jould rest securely uponthe fundamental and unalterable needs of the two countries.Such an understanding would in no way prejudice that ult imatecondit ion of Britain's defence, the insular and oceanic safety ofthe 73rit ish Isles themselves. Mat else depends, in any imaginablecircumstances, upon alliance, and fortuna,tely on an alliance,whether overt or not which is g,uaranteed by the essent ial

- 8 - 22.self-interest of the nat ions cf the 7i.Testern hemisphere . ITeverthe -less , I believe that in recent years the 73rit ish people have beentaught too readily to underest imate the ir own capac ity for mar it imetodefcnce and t.; devote/it too low a proport ion, and too small anabsolute quant ity, of the ir net iona 1 resources .In all this, the need which I see for my country may be summedup in one affirmat ion. It needs more than ever to be itself, moredeliberately, more self-conf idently, more defiantly even, but alsowith more self-understantLin and ins ight . f3rita in will not therebyhave less to contribute to the life cf other nat ions, neifghbcuringor distant ; for always throughout history, it is when Britain hashasbeen most herself that she/had most to offer.

•lir7 Una P7,17 ITCTI,,E770 RE DIME ftICHTilT YTTYSpeech by th(-- Rt . Han. J. 7nooh Powell at a(neat inu in tHe TTlst artas8 -(Dlr, T bar s day 5 I ]...;r( 7#7-, 1 c' •Whatover else the rooent General_ 2E-1 e,ct ion did, it transformedthe outlook for the loyal ma ity In.77r-n-.ern IreThand. For thef irst t toe in years they now h:_r. vc a v lIft hope and a 17:ra ct Lealprcs',pect of m.a1:i..r..7 cPrmift tha bn.t a ftn.a cla ;err_ ivihich they havealwys assertod - the riCnt to livc at:c.ear.e in th?ir own ieart oftheir own cou,ntry, the 7i-raitc.d K_ingTlo7.1„ ft one i,:rho has all along•belie7ed and as.7ertcd tht, `his oh ft -*as binding uTon the government.Parlialent and ;oE: f bo iLftti Fling d9 tT., I he e I TLay beallc-zed to re lr Iceo7;ey I To ft ;::::"Hr to dearrlost f;„11 surcoss rereaft-2r.'E. t r_ t cr• asin li-e gal:erallu, of dog e-(1 Ire-sib;:ence In as,7ert irg wh?..1-, onekmws tO be T i ht 7o7 n I re c.F., 11 the lit t le remna nt of fa tt hfulUnionist liembera, and one ar two others with, them, a handful oftendown to half a el.o7en on 79:!s3 WhO 721 c-;:ded thropp.h the lob7o1 es at7L;erltminr,tar; to c:crecord aeahnst one der7 ice after aoot.r.or fel :sherir-;-,leof this :ray fnoe cf t seeTs almosttoo 7.cod to be real. Howcr, in h:gtor7 it is alrrays by the few•that not ions are saved in t 're hC7C1! 6,:i_tren_Ity; and in futureUlster will remember with grati:-:u-ie the nones of thre se few sens ofhers who refused tc give up when the od Is aga inst then, seemedimpossible.The elector-ite of Mater have now done tho ir 7,a-ft ; and theyhave dace It ien a w2,y oi.r eaves no =or-. for .-:-.is-andersta ndirgLet me ncPce briefly the ma ,ior co1ser7.1ences.2rOn 444..t.4 tr4:44 ha17-Hte2 T-inchists .declared CO end of thntalliance -7T5tir the Consora irpe Party in/ Fri- ita in years goneby '[-,ad been s:_17:Tused the ono Lpire T.laTanoe cf the union) bat whichr.cre recently ha.d t-JY:_ad intos Les I--Vc•ls Tern. Fortcc long- the tradit tonal a:sn:-tot Ion.. Loft sway that a Consery at ive

- 2 -government at Westminster 7,ras essent ial to Ulster's interests, andth t no Trice was too high i'or Ulster to pay in order to sustain aConservat ive administration keen the P.ined friends- lp of the4,0(Conser7at ire Party. In the end it/proved a snare and a de Th_:s ion.r-Conservati,:se governi7on more inw.ee to ftcin three years than any F-2.done. :ney were able c do it ri±hI. :Ius oause t7, Tny. ea Con.:-,;ervat ire government ; no ct'.:7cr wou o da-sed to or beenLook at ale rccord. In the Cons,srv of- 1970,amongst the other debris of broken nledgas and inerted -sondes,we read this about 1,Torthern Ireland: "T.Te reaffirm that no changewill be made in the constitutional status of ITorthern Irelandwithout the free consent of the Parliament of T,Torthern Ireland".The Conservat ive government 's method of fulfililne that part icularpledge Irls to abolish the Parliament of Uorthern Ireland altogether,and to abolish it in twenty-four hours flat - "at a stroke' if Imay coin a phrase - without ever consulting that Parliament, letalone obtaining its "free consent" Could cynicism be carriedfurther? The answer is, yes perhaps, when one remembers the treatment.which the Conservat ive government meted out to one TilsterPremier after another, stringing them along --ith promises and hal 1-=promises, nods and winks, and then dashing them down with a lit:tat,7 ike the luckless Brian Baulkner, summoned to London in l''f.arch 1972to n.2 told that his government and Parliament were both, to hasuspended and that he could like it or lump it.along it was not nster, a part of the Hnited'19that the Conservative -,7o'rern ent as th aboun 9 but EurcTe.northern Ireland in its eyes .rasalways threatening to relet ftuntrL. — r:Tis•rIce,T-I'russ212 nod,'='rd destined anyno7,7 to ne 22ten noet- nomic and 1:,olit ical anasn-n korean,Iritish and them offcc s and try not tc. ft

- 3Talking about a faked constitution brings me to "powersharing",and to the second great assertion 7,Thich the electorate ofThrthern Ireland made on 28th February - namely, that they wouldh..ve none of it. The constitution forced on Northern Ire_ nd inagainst the votes and voices of the representatives of thema:_,rity in this province is an absurdity. It is, as some of ussaid in the House of Commons at the time, an outrage upon the princiles of responsible democrat ic government which no other part ofthe United Kingdom would tolerate, or be e7Tected to tolerate, foran instant. Its absurdity guaranteed that it ,,ould be unworkableand re,lected4 \fet the absurdity was not the result of mere sturidror inadvertence. This monstrosity was framed in the attempt -albeit vain, as such attempts invariably are - to give satisfactionto those who are opposed to 7:-,rthern Ireland being part of theUnited Kingdom at all. It was a constitutional contradiction interms, behind which lay the barely concealed impatience of thegovernment at Westminster to see Northern Ireland glide or slideor slither into union with the epublic. To this chimera theelectors of Northern Ireland have put paid, by dec isively withdrawingfrom it all claim to represent them. It still exists intheory,- but henceforward it is a dummy, a wreck, a waterloggedhulk. There is no life, or possibility of life, in it. 'hateverykLt.7asse,ad tr-ae government at Westminster or the men representing nobody whoform t he Execut iv e .mazi=azics:Gz:s4 the 1973 Co nst itut ion is dea d ,will soon have to be tidied away into the limbo where such abor-4110t ions bolon. Every day that it continues its charade ofaexistence,zthe more harm it does - but more of that anon.For the moment let us note another fact of 28t h February.That T-ray confirmed, what Unionists and the ir fr lends here 9ndelsewhere have t iral essly proclaimed amid '.--:ockery and contra diction, that jtha uneouivocal ass

in many seats are auite unintelligible unless really substantia7n':.mbers of Roman Catholics voted for the Union and against powers'f-aring,and not only that, but for the very men whom the pressthe other media have been belabourIng as 'extremists",, In thetvaay of the polling-booth many of our Doman Catholic fellowtsgave the lie to the press and the Tledia on a scale whichno room for doubt as to where their hopes for peace anda4.4mce-i ceverment:7o I turn to the future and to hoW those hopes, 7,Th -Lc h are thehcl:e:e of all but a small minority ia this land, ought to bef:Llf 'tiled.For four and a half years now- this prey ince has been racked7cy murder and guerilla war en a scale which is a scandal and disgraceto the Parliament end government of the United Kin'gdom, whonot only have always acknowledc-ed theipult imate res-oonsibility buthave seized the direct responsibility. Under successive Parliaments,successive governments have applied one expedient after another.I le= has been distress ingly uniform •Fattelett. As each expedient.4444*-4tiezxwas applied, it was ent has iast ically opened anew era. Downing Street declarat ion, Direct Rule, Power-shar ing,the rest, they all contained .t..6* hoped-for magic.al in7redient -until they were tried; end then the same consequences followed,with the only difference that each time they were a little worsethan the t ime beforP and the pessimism returned the more :crofouridfor repetition. Cn each ereas Ion a handful of mo-mbers at-":estmlnsteritol,d a i'-:ouse of Com,:ons hich 1;1 not is h hearep/14....,that only bloodshed would foilow and that the promisc, of improvementwas fallacious. They did so, and were always prove,d ri7ht,not bec3use they were exce-pt ionaily luchy et a euess Inc Ta,Lae t,utbecause each successive act of policy conta ined the som e , inev itablyfatal element, by which it was 17rodictably foredeorled.That eleT:ent was TImbiguity. Go beck to l';q77:::), nhd trece fromts.sh yourselves as yo7_7. cc,:ne to .-72ch of the!-r. "Isthis r_clicy intended to streng- -Jeh the rlIon? these thEJ' words

and actions of men who mean to give assurance tbat the union is17:cvmarient?" In every instance the answer is: "No: the opposite."'-7;atever tradit ional formulae were repeated by those in off ic ialpevit ions, nobody listening and watching could doubt which -ray they. No doubt the majority in Tirlster were for the union, buts there was the fatal "but". Always the result was to conveyto those who wished to see the union destroyed that violencew'as pushing the Brit ish government step by step in the direct ioriwhich the v iolent desired. The v iolence did pay off.7;Thse who say that the fundamental remedy for the war inUort arn Ireland is political are right, but not in the sense inwhich they have usually meant it. It ris not the construction ofnot itut ions and agreements whichrean all things to all men anda:::tempt to reconc lie the irreconcilable that will bring peace tothis prov ince; for the v iolence feeds upon ambiguity. Ambiguitygives the green light to murder, while at the same time it conveysto those who wish to uphold law and order the message that sooneror later they may expect to be left in the lurch. This is why foryear after year, not to their liking, I told tbe British House ofCommons that the bloodshed in Tilster was upon their heads; forthey it was who approved, nay insisted upon, the very coursesofdoubletalk and double-think which fuelled the guerilla fire&The political remedy, which has stared us in the face allthese years, is to make it clear beyond peradventure that theent status of Northern Ireland as part of the T_Inited K 11-1,7dOMis hot F:oing to be altered, and that since the Parliament ofNorthern Ireland is now no more, that affirmat ion is taken over bythe only Parliament there is - the Parliament of the 7J-riftedThe political remedy is to remove the ambiguity of the past andmake it clear by deeds, not formulae, that the union is beyond therech of violence, ho-ever brutal, however persistent. Therebyv iolence is deprived of its hope; and hope is the food on oh icho icie,nce is nourished. Cut off the food: the violence 7:ill die.ArAtheir lives and their i7i-ortal souls In a Cal:Vse 0Th ichhas some possibility respect of success: they rH11 nctThrcar

-6-them away for what is not there to be had. How then is certaintytobe given?There is one step which more than anything else would seal the;44e-vocoirc,„-_,,atus of '2-orthern Ireland as being as nearzies humanly possible)4ppe-v-e-ce in the eyes of the United Kingdom andthe world. It ismoreover a step wh ich in common just ice cannot be denied or arguedagainst. And it is a step upon which fate has delivered into thehands of the Ulster Unionists the power to insist. If HorthernIreland, as all assert, is part of the United Kingdom, then UorthernIreland has an indefeasible and indisputable claim to be representedin the Parliament of the United Kingdom as amply as any other part.While Stormont existed, with a Parliament of its own and a governmentof its own, the deliberate under-representation of the:Lsixcount les of Ulster was at least superf ic ially arguable, though notlogical. Now that Stormont is no more, even that argument is gone.It cannot be defended that these counties, which in any othersimilar part of the realm would be represented by twenty seats, orat the least eighteen, have only twelve.How vital is the removal of this injustice becomes instantlyclear when one listens to the excuses by which it is defended. Letus wa it say the apologist s, to see how the new-fa ngled const itutionwill develop, in case that development should be inconsistent withfull representat ion at Westminster. The White Paper of the lateGovernment was even more revealing "integration" (that is, fullrepresentation at ',1estminster) "would be unacceptable to theRepublic of Ireland and would make co-eperat ion (whose?) with theRepublic more diff icult". There you have it . A part of the TTnitedngdom is to rema in underrepresented in Parliament to please afereien country which happens to claim that tart as its own territory.The maintenance of the unjust treatment of the 77ster electorateis the plain signal to the 'depublic and the republicans thnt the/4‘1-door to what they des ire a adz:he 73 jority of Ulster people re jectis being unlocked. i-Tence the tempt-t ion to push and kick thatdoer open, or (should I say?) to blast it open with explosive.

- 7 -The connection between iestmtnster representation and death on thestreets in Northern Ireland is direct and unequivocal.Irrespect ive, therefore, of whatever may be the future formthe local administration of this province, I submit, as I havehe consistently from the outset, that the foremost and unequivocald.7;cland of the people of Northern Ireland must be for their fu77representation in the Parliament of their own United Kingdom. Itis not a demand which the British House of Commons can refuse withoutself-contradiction. It is not a demand to which either of thetwo great parties in the state can without disgrace remain deaffar though the Conservative Part has fallen in the recent pastfrom the meaning and idea of "one nation", I fail to gee how itcan persist in denying to any part of a United Kingdom equality oftreatment with the rest; and as for the Labour Party, heirs to theradical programme of equal const ituenqes arid equal vot ing power,how can they reconcile their political conscience to the grotesqueinequality imposed on those who live in Ulster?The acceptance of this act of simple justice to the people ofUlster would not be divisive but healing. It Is a truism, withwhich none but the tiniest minority in these counties would quarrel,that we wish to see our Roman Catholic fellow-subjects take no lessamole a part in the political life of this nation than any others;and I referred earlier to the sig.nificantand wholesome fact thatthousand upon thousands of them had declared their will to do soin a United Kingdom at the ballot-boxes on 2Eth 7ebru=_)ry. It is afurther truism, that we wish to see political life and work-, andthought concerned no less in this orov ince than elsewhere with thegreat issues that confront the whole nation, -Jith the entire sweepOf economic, social ani international policy. For Tany yc-ars butof late to a degree intolerable and disastrous, these mantfcstdcsires ef the -people of -27crthe-r.o Ireland have been frustrated bylaustrophobia ricsed neon ther, by a series of const itut ionale-q-,edionts arid contradict ions, as result cf which hey haveb).7c,,-i held to the world di stort Inc ,Tirror cf caricaturea 1.1(d slander as 7,ccrle bocteJ and paroch ial, qurrell in7 over

- 8ifpast grievances with their backs to the outSide world.Everybody aho knows the indiv idual Ulster man or woman in t helifP and work: •f the United Kingdom arid far beyond its snores,knol^r13 what a lie and calumny that picture is; but it is a mouldthat m:ust decisively be broken. The full repreye'ntation of Ulsterin Parliament would be the unmistakable declaration that the yearsaAc.luarantine for Ulster over. Cif course, "the border" -that strange euphemism for Ulster's right to be and to remain partof the United Kingdom - cannot be "taken out of politics" (as thes ickly phrase runs), because it is supremely a political cuest ion- indeed the supreme political question. Bit it is a politicalcuostion of the United Kingdom as a whole. Those who thought ori'oped that it could be otherwise were sharply undeceived in March1/AZAP-oev "1)72. The illusion that could be left on the doorstep ofStormont bedev illed this prov ince in the late 1960 s ; and •_444 agonyin the early 1970's has been increased and prolonged by successiveattempts - Sunningdale and the paper constitution of 1973 are theikaik.44.44:fitlatest - to imorison the people of Morthern Ireland within it oncemore. So long as "irt—ne-fftagn rig//politics in Ulster - aFainst its will and a a inst its interest -will rema in sectarian div isive and v iolent.7 ----A.8. -.4!44,?-414-ii444.4v r 'Xv''a — 7.1..e.the -34,r-rkyri endurestt he pclit ics of'\.ar.e p:art_of the polit ics of the United Kingdor3 Let the people()7 1of Northern Ireland be given at last thoir fair part, and no morethan the ir fair part in those polit ics - let them be treated noworse, arid also no better, than the people of any other prov incecf the realm - arid we shall soon begin to sec the nightmare oftheir years of exclusion and ostracism dissolve.I will make a confession to you, a confession it is noshame for a parliamentarian to make. I belioyc in magic, in thenag ic of the free parliament cf a united nat ion. Yha-tver may betrue of other countries, it is Parliament , the undiv ided sovere ignparliament of this Kingdom, upon ahich the unity- .cf the nationrend 71ster cannot sh'-Irr-3. in tht 1.1nIty Exc,-.-it by sh:Iring,w it hout Jualif icat ion or diminut ion, in t?:e urwite ihled sea ere ig.nty

- 9 -of that parliament. Hitherto the peoole of Trorthern Ir:_,•land havebeen orov inc Il in nothing but their politics. 7‘Tow the ir politicscc, through the transformation that the General Election brouc:7httrest cease to be provincial. Henceforward no horizon neP,dride. I look forward to the day when the constituoNcieswill see those who represent them chosen anon7 the rest,without regard to creed or cl!9ss, to gove.rn arld to lead the British

NOT FOR PUBLICAT IONBEFORE TIME OF DELIVERYSpeech by the Rt. Hon. J. Enoch Powell, to the AnnualDinner of the Guild of British Newspaper Editors.Grosvenor Hotel, Chester8 pm, Saturday, 6th April 1974The three years ending with the recent General Election andchange of government are not a period on which the British pressin general ought to look back with any sense of sat isfact ton. Youmay bridle a little at so bald a statement, and be tempted towonder if the remark has bien sent to the wrong address. I believenot; and I will try to exclain why.One would need to go back a long way to find an instancewhere the hopes and expectations of a government and of its•supporters and well-wishers ended so soon and so crushingly inpolit ical disaster as those of the Conservat ive government ,,rh ichcame into office in June 1970. The most pessimist ic and malevolentill-wisher would not then have predicted that less than four yearsw-suld see that government rejected at the polls, against a backgroundof unprecedented trading def ic it unprecedented inflat ion,falling economic growth, low investment and eyeball-to-eyeballconfrontation between authority and the trade unions. Eachcherished intention and ambit ion was not merely unfulfilled, butfulfilled in reverse to an extreme degree. The control of inflationas first priority; high and steady economic growth and investment;an end to the recurrent external deficits of the past; a "newdeal at work" and peace and order in industry - these had been thebold inscriptions on the 'victorious banners of 1970. All were_3doomed to signal disappointment; and, to crown everything else,the great strategic centrepiece, linked inseparably with thereputat ion of the Prime Minister himself, the entry of Brita ininto the C , turned so sour in the nation's mouth that it wasthought inadvisable even to mention it in the popular version ofthe election manifesto.What happened? What went wrong? All this was no merebuffet ing by the winds and waves cf unpredictable circumstance.Oil and the October war, a deteriorat ion in the real terms of

- 2 -trade, terrorists here, Ugrndans - not ee ln committedapologist could find in sucL suffu ient explanation fora government driven off course, le:: alone driven directly onto therocks. The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune were no morethan ordinarily in evidence. Neither, as some superficial commentimplied, was the disastrous outcome a result of obstinate persist-.ence in oarsuing ill-conceived policis or fulfilling ill-advisedpromises, without regard to altreu circumstances, ju.st becausethe policies had been espoused and thc promises made.The tru,a 3auses of disaster Tay in exactly the opposite direction.This a a government under ,-,raich the 7-turn became theitsnorm. Wit j.X months of/entering office, the fundamental positionswnic. tile government party had presented to the electoratebe ingduring t:s ye.',:c's of oppos it ion and at the 1970 Elect ion i.rere /overturnedone af'::er another, almost as if it 7:Tere done as a systematicoperation. D3ficit snonding in a period of already high inflationwas pushed LC) unexampled heights; nat ionalised industrie s wereincreasingly subsidised; public money was invested in nrivateindustry; and finally, when the predictable conseqn_ences followedn the form of soaring inflation, the government plui-I.J.ed -iown theroad of statutory control over wages and prices, which everyoneknew, or should have known, led to a precipice. Statu.;ory wage-.:ontrol, ha heath himself had sa id in a telev is ion ii_terv ew inZay 1970, 'we 11d make industrial relat ions with the u.nions muchworse, play into the hands of the extremists, and prove to be6futiTo 7,,k) !Adel' the government's supporters, inside and outsideParliament, sat frozen into immobility as the government proceeded,with lemmin -like single-mindedness, to incur its own anathema andfulf il its cwn predict ions . The only thing uncerta in was exactlywhen and at 7,:nai- point the edge of the precipice would be reached.That point a-zr:_„ed eighteen months later, when the electorate wasinv ited to ar t h e government an increased majority in the nameof polic ies lready bankrapt and in defence of a pos it ionmanifestly untenable. The bizarre consequence was that Members

7-and candidates found themseYes in ,ting e1ec vote for themnot merely in support of the ceopns'.17e policy J'hat on 7,,hich theythemselves had been elected less than four years earlier, but insupport of a policy which many of them personally had continuedto condemn and actually repudiated on the hustings. It oftenhappens that candidates reserve their own position on this or thatpoint of a pTerty programme mhen fp.cing the electors; but it ouldbe hard c i'ind precedent for en election where candidates weredissoc iat themselves from their Party upon the very issue on•which the c't ion was being for.ghi,EveL a:,-; the fiasco of comnuLsory wage and price control would 8not have udftcient by itself to put the government out ofoff ice - ;Tale was actually turned by another and even morefundameen...caTi :--evrsal. The strong preference of the government, andof the h2,-;c1 oe:7 the government, for British membership of the EEChad never beam. doubted r concealed. What had also been unequivocallyand cothoritatively declared - though most would have regardedoutit as axiomatic even with/declaration - was that British entrycould not be conceived unless the step enjoyed the "fuileheartedconsent" of the nat ion - "of Parliament and people", as the famousphrase went. It was the breaking of this promise which broughtthe retr ibut ion.The temptat ion was undeniably great. The Fronch under the latePresident i-cm2idou were persuaded to consent to what his predecessorhad twice refused; the complexities of phasing Britain over afive-year period into a Community whose trading principles werecontrary te her own were to be met by transitional arrangements;the plaudY.ts of urope and America attended upon what was inaccuratel.e,hailed as Britain's "entry into Europe". One thingonly was leeLdree.; but that was the one thing without which thewhole operatie:' would be unauthorised and impermanent. It wasthe full-hea:r ed consent of Parliament and, even more, of thepeople. It 'L7, not difficult tc understand the disanpointment ofthe governmen but disappointment could not justify what theydid. They decided to coerce Parliament and to ignore the people.

—The n-tioe had neither been led nor persuaded; in the end, itwas just left behind. From that moment the writing - s on thewall.''..7hat', you may ask however, 'has all this to do with thenewspapers? Why pillory the press because politicians and part teshave broken their promises anti ignored their principles 7rith eonsegeencesunpleasant or even fatal to themselves?' The Quest ionmay be answered by a counter-quest ion where was the press whenall this was happening? The press in this country has historicallybeen reearded, riot without reason, as the guardian end safe7nard ofpolitical morality. One section of it or another might, out ofpart isanship, overlook or suppress the fact that the s ide to which•they themselves inclined had defaulted on its obligat ions. Stby arid large the press, it was assumed, would not condone or ignorebreach of undertakings or reversal of pledees, but 'eould expose tothe. censure of the electorate, not without commentary from themselves,behaviour which must, if unpunished, make a charade ofparliamentary democracy.This is not how it went during the late parliament. Thereversal by the government of the specific and emphatic undertak ingsto abjure compulsory control of wages, on which it had been elected,was hailed with paeans of praise from end to end of the press. Somenewspapers, indeed, had advocated this policy in opposition to thatof the government, and were entitled to be elated at the adoptionof their own opinion; but even they were not entitled to i,7norethe moral and political implications of raining office on one set12.of principles and then exercising it, with no compelling chari7e ofcircumstances, upon the opposite set, nor to abstain from enquiringhow it came about that the party in off ice had come to mislead theelectorate so grossly or on what theory they cons iderec7 themselvesst ill morally ent itled to govern. Even if the poLcy -'Arl,ft beliefsof 1970 had been mistaken, those who reversed them would stile",heve stood self-conv icted, and the fourth estate would st ill heveh:ad the duty of inquest. But the press did no such th nothe contrary, the few polit icians who ventured to ra ise thee

• quest ions were cynically assured by the newspapers that this ist3•just the way all governments do behave and that it doesn't matterat all so long as the thing comes off.The dereliction was even more serious in the case of theCommon Market. I am not concerned with the fact that nearly allthe newspners as a matter of editorial policy were in favour ofrbThership. This is not the point; they -were entitTedhC.d m-1 express that v iew, as much as any other minority v iew anop fni.J.1 is not necessarily the worse for that. What tho:f were notentitl(;,:', to do waE to treat as trivial, or to ignore altogether,the significance cf the fact that "full-hearted conseff,:' was absent,and upon the government's own professions 9 thene(;essa-:_-y ity for British entry was not available, The-..,Tas not the irs, but the government 's. They wereunder no obligat ion to resolve it; but they were under an obliga-tion to that it be acknowledgedWbat a the necessary consequencesshould be accepted. Almost the entire British nressfailed to do this. Indeed, even in the last few days I have seennational newspapers actually inviting the Labour government torenege upon its election policy, and complaining that the termsof that policy were candidly and accurately brought to the noticeof the other members of the European Economic Community.There is a reason why this abdicat ion by the press of itsresponsibility as a custodian of political morality is particularlyuntimely. The pressures of party conformity which bear uponpolit icians today are exceptionally strong and still growing. Ido not believe that in any previous modern period the Cabinet andthe majority party in the House cf Commons would have submittedwithout resignations or serious division to the hureili7Jting selfcontradictions which they ere compelled to swallov in 1971 and1)72. This is something novel if not in kind, in degree - theconversion of government into a sort of extension and apotheosisof the Whipg Office.It is a corrupt ion to 7A-doh, as to all for s of corruption, afree press is the proper antidote. "How came you, a d you, and you,15

•to say one thing and to do another, to speak this way and to vote-6- 16that way, to promise one thing and to perform the opposite?" Thatis the question which it is the business of a free press to ask.If it does not, if it falls out of the habit, the press soonacquire a vested interest in the errors which it has concealed orcondoned; ?.nd turn int• yet another extension of the structure ofinflu.cnce, patronage and power; for its connivance will hove.-.1.adered it an accomplice after the fact. It is for these reasonsthat .1_ said the British press has not emerged unscathed from theevents of these three years.It has every incentive to learn from that experience.Parliamentary democracy and a free press go hand in hand, the onedepending on the other's existence and well-being. The mutual1 7confidence and candour between parliament and the electurs, whichthe contradictions of the last few years have done rrruch to undermine,are essential to the existence of parliamentary democracy.That is why a free press dare never leave unexposed or unpunishedany act ion by which that mutual confidence and candour are breached,be the authors never so exalted or so apparently secure in office.ENDS

7r•7•7; r•-•:7;, ;;.,TCuto_;,;2,g,7„r '-;01?cifl,, 4-4T,7:7--"(•]fcL1-77_7=117)=2J7.cc,

Ir.()I„),r1a;444-,--I4-4(,)I - '..10el,c4-4•4--,I!)'1)...'1)Y-410 44-4HIV"Li..04.41-4QC90, - iHCL:(1).4441tL,n,01.'0:CL'r--;r --10)C)I0e 'ct4-4-,,t14,4")(1)C.)fl"IL19(14.,._i••.'lCf-4,,„!0)4 -9)"-c.0,,,..:,F4-4H'ii)99rz ,r7rAI 44-'(I)17.7.)).-,, )r•4134;4(.11. c ), . 4)44- ,4-,9C'(U(1)44444.44:4r-C,4 4r,9)( 1)40(4)4 ,-4Cr -441 444644,4 'r- I4-t.)4-44414), I4-31-44::4")4-49-91„9,9•r-,1

i'',4'f'tt'.I''°l')-,,„,1,t;tI'•1'r•il'I,°:'I':I'.1t''I•,,t -',,,114 , .--,4 '4 ^r4-:',te4-.,...I44. tt.,-3,---"-,4t'aH.4'tt,4 -1' •I',7 )-),10pp, 4t-t' --tt:-1't.tt4 ,C 1t't4tt')141-. -'4--.)0,2,,,,,,,}-i, ,I() 4',-,r,1 .1.,--,: a r,t t tt4'tt5')toCO')'44.-.t11,4 ,..--'':-',14 'r -1r•i_(4t.--.44 't ,4,-4-4,---3.,4 4- !t,,,,0r4,1-4". 4. 1, ,t4 44.4,I '...-; ,L.P'r-, ;44i 1'r ,tt'1'"t4-11'43;04titAN(.44.4..+4.,ft.t.).ff(44r ,ID,,,t-t.I.:":5'. tel' :t--N't.tt1-1 4'C''Itt= ',1:1t.--",", -41.11`- Ir-,i It,2,!:::1' .;4 '4,,st1',...7t =I--4-.tt-.!114'i 4t.t-I4,t-t44 '4:1'44 ,Si','.'1t)1,44,"It-II)C'1144C.)i,,"1",.---,'t't->-1:1c:::t-.11144-,,S)try14 )f,:),41,I1,, t.t.114.—., 14,,-;, ;11:_1:34,'t4CSt,-;'t>'.,Q1t----14,-3(3.1111.^41)pc,.,-44C..4.-1t' t(3.44--1C1,71,0,t,,19..t.44)4,1ad,4: 4,41.:11)t 2-1t4.t.411.1CU,. ;-1'r-,rr-t-4t1-LiIto:,-,tt':.1,-4 44-,ttt,t,tat.c,t.74:tDr4+3.114I4't411t-t,,p..).7,...74 ,tVt..4 '0".4f.ty14. 1I,'')t."0.tr1'1l'44-. 't,'....4 '' 4,J1.,4 )4-,,.-1',..'•)4 'I-(1,t'111›3,',",' ).1'-'11t: ,tt-,'141(i4.414 '.4 '(1''-':1 -4'''.. '*4st•1 ...1's.....,t^tt1-0.1.,,,4I.4...•-2,-,,4.1-4'-t:C.1-4 --;,t,,,,,--t14 '4 ;--lt,1'1.4)14t:r4;P-4,437)4 tC ):,- -).4'r14'(I,(...)'t -44,t ')---,-1:.:1to'1-4' :t4-,f`1'4-1

•444-044—,4-4(41 0:)4—,4-4+4

4.,141•• 4-'ci•

te,„.juentl:y 0 tVT2 TsJe I71-111, 7:E75 i 7_t eec'Hc; si7re;T.)v 1::G. e ,=-• Jt e t t , (Jr', n -I t -7-.71..; •1.rn tVVVOOto o t„„ - _t t: • "t , t t; t=•:"'=t,'

0- th th t ever; it 1' "T. • -t t t'i7; t C: - " ":1 t t te. t n t ttjt v tttth r, t tt. ...7? 1H2 1, :T. " tpfE7-:rntf.e.r1,7 1 Si_L. ii•Jtr1:•r,:r)tt-;th

cptme".tLetheir D7-iiticerzeho2 enJ-4- 1cr7erl,y the Ut-!. " 3t tea, _ tlk`J.C.Id 5v i ce, t e1r41:',.LnSfrn.t' e:iteoeter,s17,n Drb6t,:f )r -liee tt e t t " f- it.hT,e7e.r,.51 )fices- fieel .„Dff,hc7:ncequenet".tTth-''17tLA.

, =.1;.. --7 =;r2i7,74.,3( ;==":77:-.;1070,. ;g2,, 473,;e:„1-7';i31.7; 2.,Ta4unc34TJ 0; 7„).:0L7_ 1C)()leucT;'-3(J=2. ucT;u,--,,,3;uT Jo rz;ng;.H; Zq1q7cc,.7 ;T;CI Y-2J1flO2:c• ; 'cl:?..ou.GpTjuocT;Jr:Th.Tfl :H; 7ThTc,J,ca w:t1..7.;Ao7=-7 ;.‘g;c:o;* P-,:-)Tjoi-ETC Up,91_12Tur.17n77;'?c;c. 1,-2u7iTa=D cguT?Lp7:7 ;u;--,,ocu7JT

•exotlythethe se3,-.,noy,,-:;e11--.;,e,rh the.Liret,_r-cthe 7. ee,f the entire he,ve 112.ed.2t. tthienott onetr,'; teen .:,shL the c.,::,useeinfThatism. _Lu2heio3Tlyetutv tt inflstisn' freJe, ethe.2hffld cei-:.e in will-, th_e cf cloth fri,etL stg.hflpens:tH,,t 7hen eine ,;9vern.c,lent infitirprother .s.:ovrnsnts..7)neut _7:reven the exchr.: ecountrzT'scre,,-..tin it, 3rr,7. thes t.c. rtLoetherHD7'evTr, inf7tte,norltsh b' thethHto,fi..rJfitiei.n, he he s t-Theta.:7ief. the:Jur:else:, 1 • Lr7 Z..: tn •t•d - _

•r(i +7).44:r441)4—,4'7-14—,1-4•0st:4-4•-44-

t•1)tt.ett.Cr..;6PNkJ.)")tt)-g,+-'

•nIte t e n i ttrt 1 t tvorT:1t t t't b.H-3t .7;..-Le t c, • t t tL e' e_ .7. 7. t • t • ,-,t t t ..,tie:2 t '121 -

'i':'.if,.-I'rr,,•rr•.i''''•.(','r;r,i 'rIi..,•)'Ii',:'I:,('•'"r;rI..;r'...,. ,(II4 s5.47,147..3177;,, 5),4,4 .44 -04 51:44 "4-,, -11 41-7517 IaS7.75.4.5,(4.!"71IsILI4.4I•-,•44 ,6.- 54.5)971Si 74,"1 -47:4- '-I -,,1 )..711,:7.'..oC.)ti•(4,S. 5_4 7S4,74,(1I..,;,...:.-,17:47,4 -'4,4 '(.: 5',:.k`)(-'-'-5.-,'.0 '(-41,,4'7 S"..4..4575,4','`,."5"7.4'r- -'..,7,.,.r- 5,4.,0 (,--:55,•,7724--'IS,(50'42(.1.)'Ir-1.--.;(r)'15, 4(:'.-.4c_.:'.7)(5C..)(t.:(,,...)ci.:,CS5(..,.1"'.1r''),,...-:,..7.."5,-1441'0LALI -Ii:'4'..;".I)73(4.EAr..":57-7.•'5.4G (H("54-)...7,S.7.7..;C",/4-4,!:-.1CI,C-H-t-,if.;'7.1ti.),(7)r7.4 4SSII)(1).-..5-:r-r,...,4,,,,,,,1Y..4P14-,, (-t"7:,5,-.1..5..,4-4-5- i( -4P 14-)..:::4,1,2Sg•.,(I),.--.. 4, 5 ,(('i•,4C.,(514)4r.:::,...--)0..(.";:7S)CI,L.'144"-'7:7%r-;(4.5c.`5:5(1'4 ,'4-,'7,7,S.::t"-If 75(), H177:5_.,.;•15:'.),r,...-"C),fl,r,11''T..,1(-`,C...)r—,r'4,;-''''r:: ,5",....,I5,.(:-4c•70.)45(1 rl4 ,551i :0,--.5.."_:r)(-:ILj, a(!)4 4'.517;S.5r I: '(1-.'s:•5$,r:4-'4 S.154-4c :I..I..1.r,,45.',. •4 -`4-,I:1,:, I4.',--,i14 .".1I-.5.;.-•NA ',,r+.ra.4-,I ' -.3.)r,'s,T.I,,-;-5-1-..--.r-,l'Ir..,S.;((:(r.,,..14-4,-4s4 -,s.14,. .....4 ,t.404 ', r-i''., 44-,.1,„ --:4 ,,.,4 4';II)4471,'',.,'4-(4 -'!..4,-153.! ""4.4,---...1,;; ,44"Isr-45,.1",",4,-.)S 41r,4 44.,)(15'I ,,C:4 'r-1,,..',4 - ',1.,- 1(1(I•••.,r—,1'1:I..-4'-1'ss514 -'4--..(;(.!.,, ..,l'•',IN-4r.'Il'',5•5'.5545.4'' '..,0..',•,.5.',4 ,r.:I.,,.'1),,I1(.14 4., ,to':'".7, 114.,'f 1,35..- 5,S.4 '4.:7 1')4 4,4reiI5II•S 4I•rcl'(S,+., t551' II''',(-4- 4S75.7.)1S r-‘+,.. -•'+11,- 4;S4 44- 'i::,1,cs4 rS.:t,4.-)4 -5511.14 ,

0•4-4Ir..4 4 '4-,( -10 C4 -I4 '1: 4 -,'4., I .4-,:4)4414C.)fr-4 1:444)427.147 •4 .'4)•(4..4(1,4

theEf_eF thz Ti-ve T-tre.C:t.4772"::, __. :1:-• t z7 -t :1.; , .-..,.- L,:i. -,._.,., .._e i.r t T. 7.,,-,-- - T °,..1-_-_, '_,:-: 1: . 7., 4_ 4 ._- f • 41../-7 i-,7 i-v I 4-14,t_c?cl."--t;4-4- 26 zA,,,,t /216,--' illY--ne,.,../cd.' t/i A 4-=2„4-4.4,.z. te i it, ( d- A-i , w- --1---4 _//'/ Z4-Allow /4e.e., ‘e-z- .,t_ 2.7,----e,-11--)H--1kt‘4-76e1-1,