Prof. Timothy A. SMIDDY Minds of governments pastBy TOM GARVIN The gradual establishment of the Irish Free State and Northern IrelAND the rapid evolution of what had been the British Empire into an authentic Commonwealth of equal nations, led by Canada and the emergent independent Ireland of the 1920s: this is the unifying theme of a new Royal Irish Academy book. Documents in Irish Foreign Policy, Volume II, 1923-1926 (edited by Ronan Fanning, Michael Kennedy, Dermot Keogh and Eunan O'Halpin) is the second volume in a series of publications intended to give the public and the academic world an inside view of Irish Government thinking on political, social and economic relationships with the outside world. This volume deals with official documents dating from December 6th, 1922 to March 19th, 1926. Through membership of the Commonwealth, friendship with the US and pioneering participation in the League of Nations, the Irish Free State made its mark internationally in an original way, despite partition and an always worrying and persistent campaign by a militant and destructive anti-democratic minority, in the form of IRA and communist organisations. These organisations were particularly destructive in the US, and damaged the cause of independent Ireland there in ways that are probably immeasurable. Timothy A. SMIDDY, an economist, crops up in this fascinating compilation of official documents. SMIDDY represented the Irish Government in the US from early 1922. Another figure who features prominently is Kevin O'Sheil, who had been the first Dail local justice in Co Clare in 1920, and who found time during the Irish War of Independence to write a competent history of the American War of Independence, published in Dublin in 1920 and intriguingly entitled The Birth of a Republic. O'Sheil's contempt for anti-Treatyites became evident early on. In a September 1922 memo to Cosgrave, in his capacity as president of the new Irish state, he remarks that various "Northern Sinn Feiners (chief of whom was Eamonn Donnelly)" were organised ostensibly for "guarding against partition, but in reality to molest and obstruct us in every conceivable way". He also observed acutely the Belfast versus "Ruralista" division within what was becoming Northern Ireland. Later, he argued that Craig, as prime minister of Northern Ireland, would take every advantage of IRA antics in the South to make what might be a convincing case for Northern separatism from the rest of Ireland. Every Protestant murdered in Munster and every sign the Dublin Government was vulnerable to subversion acted in his favour. SMIDDY, meanwhile, comes across as an altogether cooler mind. In late 1922, he warns Dublin that executions of republicans might damage its status in the minds of Irish-Americans and might "act in the minds of the young as an incitement to future rebellions". Smiddy kept a vigilant eye on Bob Briscoe as well. Michael MacWhite and Vaughan Dempsey feature prominently as highly competent diplomatic representatives, as does Joseph Walshe, secretary of what was emerging as the Department of External Affairs (the Department of Foreign Affairs). Sean Murphy, in Rome, warns Dublin in early 1923 of the unease that existed in Rome, in ecclesiastical circles, about the policy of executions. O'Shiel deals with the "Boundary Question" in early 1923, and worries the North may be able to argue for a rationalisation of the frontier along the lines of the railways: "The North wishes to include Pettigo . . . and perhaps one or two neighbouring districts in. . . Donegal. In east Donegal, they quite clearly wish to include at least enough territory to give them the whole of the Great Northern Railway from Strabane to Derry and they would probably take the whole of the Inishowen Peninsula if they got it". However, they would cough up bits of Fermanagh and might be willing to give up south Armagh, whatever about south Down. Already, the two Irelands were arguing about tiny chunks of land. SMIDDY documents James Larkin's involvement not only with the anti-Treatyites but also with the Bolshevik government in Moscow in 1923. "Larkin was told . . . that any remarks about bourgeois or middle-class people came with very poor grace from him, as it was the bourgeois that got him out of Sing Sing when his own bunch could not do anything for him." The Department of External Affairs displayed an early awareness of the analogies between the emergent independent IrelAND parallel events in Finland in the early 1920s. The Irish Government was informed of the Carelia problem, a bone of contention between emergent FinlAND Soviet Russia. Carelia was divided between western Finns of Lutheran faith and eastern Finns of Orthodox religion. Some of the latter hankered after a union with the Soviet state. The Irish analogies were implicit. MacWhite celebrates the admission of the Free State to the League in November, 1923. He writes proudly: "Henceforward, [Ireland] is a part of the European comity, to whose civilisation she contributed so unstintingly during the Middle Ages." Desmond FitzGerald has a rather heated meeting in late 1923 with British representatives over the question of a separate Irish citizenship. He avers that the term "British subject" included everyone from Baldwin to "an undiscovered savage in British Guyana". Diarmuid O'Hegarty, as an apparent last throw, proposes an All-Ireland federation in 1924, remarking at one stage the North "will not consent to give up its legislature or its executive as it is at present constituted". He warns of the grim prospect of there being eventually a separate Dominion of Northern Ireland. Intriguingly, he remarks: "Whether we like it or not, the Irish Free State will ultimately find itself unable to continue to demand the retention by Great Britain of powers in respect of any portion of Ireland." This is a marvellous compilation, compulsory reading for any student of Irish political development. The series is in itself a major Irish intellectual landmark. Documents in Irish Foreign Policy, Volume II, 1923-1926, edited by Ronan Fanning, Michael Kennedy, Dermot Keogh and Eunan O'Halpin, is published by the Royal Irish Academy (£30) Tom Garvin is Professor of Politics at in University College, Dublin. His most recent book is 1922: the Birth of Irish Democracy. His Mythical Thinking in Political Life will be published in 2001. www.ireland.com Building a state in the shadow of civil war (Part 2)The crisis, which was also rooted in other "grievances", was quickly averted, but not before the resignation of two ministers and of three of the army's highest-ranking officers. But the "army crisis" never remotely reached Bonapartist proportions where a coup d'etat was threatened. It was the measure of the professionalism of the army that Ireland, unlike other new states, never underwent a phase of direct military rule in its early years. That professionalism was evident during Cosgrave's handing over of power to de Valera and Fianna Fail following the general election in February, 1932. At the height of the civil war, the Cumann na nGaedheal government was far-sighted enough to establish an unarmed force police which was named the Garda Siochana. That force was initially 4,000 strong and that rose to over 6,500 by the late 1920s and was deployed throughout the country during the civil war. Cumann na nGaedheal also managed to secure the functioning of a national court system under an independent judiciary. The writ of the government ran throughout the country, helping to establish the rule of law and return the countryside to a sense of "normalcy". Actions of that kind - the establishment of state institutions - were not likely to make the rafters ring in republican Ireland, no more than the restoration of an efficient national railway and transport system. An impecunious government, burdened by the debt of civil war destruction, also tackled agricultural reform with the Land Act (1923), which reconstituted the Land Commission. All accounts of the Cumann na nGaedheal government celebrate the building of the successful Shannon Scheme (1925-9) which helped initiate the mass electrification of the country. It was imaginatively conceived and showed real vision for achieving rapid industrialisation. Post-revolutionary Ireland - living with expectations elevated unrealistically by the political rhetoric of 1919-1921 - did not provide the government with much opportunity to achieve rapid and radical social reform. Emigration continued, 220,591 leaving for the US between 1921 and 1930. Those numbers were reduced radically only when world depression hit in the late 1920s. The Minister for Finance, Ernest Blythe, may have made many good decisions during his tenure but he will be most remembered for his reduction of old age pensions, and for cutting the pay of national teachers and gardai in 1931 - the year before a general election. His colleague, the Minister for Education, Eoin MacNeill, was an effective and creative manager of a portfolio which established a highly centralised system of educational control. His progressive ideas, and those of his predecessor, for the teaching of Irish have yet to be acknowledged, as have Cumann na nGaedheal's efforts to publish and provide books in Irish at an economical price. MacNeill's name is more associated with the failure of the Boundary Commission in 1925. Although he was not to blame for the fiasco, he subsequently resigned from his role as Free State representative on the three-man committee. He quit the cabinet when the Irish government signed an agreement with the British and Northern Ireland governments, shelving the commission's findings. The "failure" of the Boundary Commission was a propaganda victory for the republican opposition. The border remained unchanged and partition remained intact. But "failure" was not a fair reading of the outcome. However, Cumann na nGaedheal remained particularly poor at ensuring that its own public relations reflected to its ultimate political advantage. Caught up in the affairs of state, the governing party made no attempt to build its own party into a modern organisation. Cosgrave's government secured greater recognition of Irish independence in the international arena. The government had been swift to join the League of Nations and register the Anglo-Irish Treaty in Geneva as an international agreement. In another multilateral forum, the British Commonwealth, the constitutional creativity of Kevin O'Higgins helped give member states greater legislative independence from Westminster. Beginning with the Balfour declaration, the process concluded with the passage of the Statute of Westminster in 1931. In 1924, Dublin became the first among the members of the Commonwealth to send an envoy, the UCC Professor of Economics, Timothy A. SMIDDY, to Washington. There was already an Irish High Commissioner in London. The Free State established in 1929 diplomatic relations with France, Germany and the Holy See at ministerial level. Despite Britain's desire to obfuscate the independence of Commonwealth countries in international affairs, Cosgrave's government took full advantage of working on the international stage to demonstrate the country's sovereignty. To that end, Cosgrave also made a number of visits abroad, most especially to the United States in 1928. Perhaps, too, the Cumann na nGaedheal government of 19221932 has been incorrectly characterised as being conservative. That description deserves to be strongly qualified. There is often reference in the texts to the power of the Catholic church and its influence over film and book censorship and over the prohibition of divorce. Although Ulysses was not banned in this country when it was published in 1922, the printers working on the Dublin Review refused to set a favourable review by Con Leventhal, who wrote the famous lines in revenge: "a censoring God came out of the machine to allay the hell-fire fears of the compositors' solidarity". Leventhal, not to be bested, published his review in a single issue magazine which he called Klaxon. That spirit of defiance was matched in the 1920s by a strong censorious spirit which found expression in the hearings of the Committee on Evil Literature in 1926. The state was not supportive of the conservative organisations which favoured radical censorship. This was reflected in the wording of the Censorship Act 1929 - the application of which by far exceeded the terms of the legislation from the 1930s onwards. However, the Free State remained predominantly Catholic and nationalist in ethos and in outlook. The government was active in the celebration of the Catholic Emancipation Centenary in 1929. Throughout the 1920s, the leaders of the State and the Catholic church were prominent on public and state occasions. But the intimacy in the relationship between prelates and politicians did not result in the creation of a sectarian or confessional state. Cosgrave's government sought to protect the rights of minority religious groups and fought against church attempts to institutionalise discrimination. That independent frame of mind was displayed in Cosgrave's letter to Cardinal Joseph MacRory on March 28th, 1931: "We feel confident that Your Eminence and Their Lordships the Bishops appreciate the effective limits to the powers of Government which exist in relation to certain matters if some of the fundamental principles on which our State is founded are not to be repudiated. Such repudiation direct, or indirect, would, we are convinced, entail consequences very detrimental to the country's welfare." Cosgrave and his ministerial colleagues had the strong desire to achieve - with the state of Northern Ireland as a reverse image - a society south of the border characterised by tolerance. In viewing the 1920s in the round, it is important to stress the success of Cumann na nGaedheal's democratic revolution - the establishment of a liberal democracy and of the institutions of the state - parliament, executive and judiciary. The legacy of Cosgrave and Cumann na nGaedheal was recognised in Dail Eireann by a once arch-rival, Sean Lemass, whose brother, Noel, had been killed by government forces in somewhat sinister circumstances during the civil war. Speaking as taoiseach, Sean Lemass paid a generous tribute to William Cosgrave following his death in 1965; he spoke of Cosgrave's generosity of spirit, the exemplary character of his long life, and of the enduring work that he had done for Ireland. The same could also have been said for the other Cumann na nGaedheal ministers. William T. Cosgrave, revolutionary, democrat and parliamentarian, had sought to bring to pass a closure of civil war wounds. Cosgrave and his colleagues did so and, in doing so, they did the state some service. Dr Dermot Keogh is Professor of History and head of the History Department, UCC. His most recent book, Jews in Twentieth Century Ireland - Refugees, Anti-Semitism and the Holocaust, is published by Cork University Press. www.ireland.com |