The Home Rule Bill of 1912, however, was not as far reaching as many think it could, or should have been. The Irish Nationalist party would have expected complete independence and separation but instead got a bill that was fundamentally the same as the bill Gladstone tried to introduce almost 20 years prior to this. In fact, some aspects of the 1912 bill were even more limiting that those in the 1893 bill. Liberals proposed giving the Irish government influence rather than powers. Their government was to consist of an elected executive, similar to the House of Lords. However, it would still have to check with the existing British House of Lords before passing any measure, suggesting that the Irish government would have had absolutely no political freedom – it was simply two extra ‘layers’ under the existing British political system. Britain also still made any financial decisions for Ireland. If anything, the introduction of the home rule bill would have effectively been like placing some Irish people in the existing British House of Lords – they would have gained minimal influence, but absolutely no power.
This bill, however limited, still nearly caused a civil war. The conservatives, who were now lead by Andrew Bonar-Law, a much tougher character than his predecessor Balfour, were determined to vehemently oppose the bill. Bonar-Law, who had grown up in Ulster, was particularly sympathetic to the outlook of the Ulster Unionists, those fighting for Ireland to remain a part of the Britain. Law argued that the liberals had no enthusiasm for the Home Rule Bill, and that it was simply a ‘corrupt bargain’ between Asquith and Redmond, introduced only to retain Irish votes and prop up the government.
Although the bill easily passed through the House of Commons, it was severely rejected by the House of Lords, as predicted. The parliament act of 1911, which abolished the absolute veto of the House of Lords over legislation, meant that the bill could not have been abolished but only delayed. However, the two-year delay was bound to severely increase tension and encourage extremism in Ulster.
Even before the Home Rule Bill was presented to commons, the Ulster Unionist council, which was originally formed in 1905, had begun to organize resistance. The co-operation of the Conservative Party meant that, in addition to its own propaganda, it was relatively easy for the Ulster Unionist’s case to be presented to the British people. As their resistance built, two men prominently emerged as the main leaders of the Irish Unionists – Sir Edward Carson and James Craig.
Carson, who was a lawyer by profession and a liberal unionist MP for Dublin University, was a strong personality and very committed to the union. Some historians have speculated how far Carson would have been willing to go, as he was so determined to organize resistance. However, historians such as Graham Dangerfield see Carson as constitutionalists who was shrink from open insurrection. His profession of a lawyer suggests that he would have acted politically and legally, without violence. The same cannot be said for James Craig, however, who was single mind, obstinate and determined at all costs to resist the bill, using ANY means possible, and ultimately, armed resistance.
Initially, resistance took the form of demonstrations and meetings. Both leaders were present when 100,000 people marched through Balmoral, two days prior to Asquith's introduction of the bill to the House of Commons. This displayed the solidarity of Protestant Ulster, and soon after ‘Covenant Day’ was announced as an official holiday. It was marked by more parades, demonstrations and signings of ‘The Solemn League and covenent’ which was signed by a quarter of a million men, some of which supposedly signed in their own blood, a small reflection of what was to follow.
Although the Ulster volunteer force was certainly an illegal operation (by this time they had drilled and trained volunteer soldiers), they felt justified
