Models of Government and Anglo-Irish Relations

1988 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan J. Ward
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
British Empire ◽  
Free State ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
War Of Independence ◽  
The People ◽  
Lower House ◽  
Irish People ◽  
Irish Free State ◽  
The Government

In 1922 the Irish Free State began life with a constitution which embodied two contradictory principles. The first recognized that all powers of government derive from the people and provided for a system of government in which the Irish Cabinet was clearly responsible to the popularly elected Irish lower house, Dail Eireann. The second recognized a monarch, King George V, as head of the Irish executive, with substantial prerogative powers derived not from the Irish people but from British common law. The constitution was a compromise between Britain and Irish republicans to end the Irish War of Independence. Though not every compromise in politics makes complete sense, for Britain this one represented more than a short-range expedient. Its contradictions represented the dying gasp in a long, often anguished, and ultimately futile attempt by Britain to devise a formula which would simultaneously permit the Irish a measure of self-government and protect vital British interests in Ireland.This essay will review the attempts to construct a satisfactory Anglo-Irish relationship in the years between 1782 and 1949. It will concentrate on four models of government proposed for Ireland: (a) the independent Irish Parliament of the period from 1782 to 1800, (b) O'Connell's proposals to repeal the union with Britain in the 1830s and 1840s, (c) the devolution proposed in the home rule bills of 1886, 1893, 1912, and the Government of Ireland Act of 1920, and (d) the independence provided in the Irish Free State constitution of 1922 and its successor, the Irish constitution of 1937. It will also place these models in the context of the constitutional evolution of the British Empire. In the Canadian, New Zealand, Australian, and South African colonies, colonial self-government and British imperial interests were reconciled, beginning in Nova Scotia in 1848, by using a kind of constitutional double-think involving the Crown and the colonial Governor. But the problem of the troubled Anglo-Irish relationship could not be resolved so easily.

Southern Irish Loyalism from Home Rule Crisis to Republic: An Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Brian Hughes ◽  
Conor Morrissey
Keyword(s):  
Civil War ◽  
Final Section ◽  
General Election ◽  
Free State ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
War Of Independence ◽  
The Third ◽  
Thematic Framework ◽  
Irish Free State

This chapter-length introduction provides a chronological, historiographical, and thematic framework for the volume. It begins by setting out the book’s remit, outlining its understanding of loyalism, and broadly defining the individuals and groups under consideration. The introduction then provides an overview of the history and historiography of southern Irish loyalism in three sections. The first covers the period from the third Home Rule bill in 1912 to the 1918 general election while the second takes in the Irish War of Independence (1919–21) and Irish Civil War (1922–23). This is followed by a final section on southern loyalists and loyalism after southern Irish independence, from the foundation of the Irish Free State in 1922 to the exit from the commonwealth and declaration of a republic in 1949.

The Irish Constitution

1924 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 340-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan F. Saunders
Keyword(s):  
Free State ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
Traditional Methods ◽  
Sinn Fein ◽  
Political Drama ◽  
Irish Free State ◽  
The Government ◽  
Almost Continuous

The Constitution of the Irish Free State is the result of a political drama extending over a period of eight years. From the Ulster Rebellion and the Home Rule Act of 1914, the action has been tense and almost continuous. The threats and concessions of that time played into the hands of the radical Sinn Fein, and with the Easter Rebellion of 1916 it became evident that the issue was no longer one of home rule but of independence. The government at London, however, did not realize this until once more the traditional methods of settlement had been tried.

Home Rule for India

1919 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 301-305
Author(s):  
Graham H. Stuart
Keyword(s):  
Civil Service ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
Queen Victoria ◽  
The People ◽  
Political Office ◽  
National Congress ◽  
The Government ◽  
Indian National Congress

The epoch-marking proclamation issued by Queen Victoria in 1858 announced to the people of India that they were to be admitted freely and impartially to political office. The autocratic bureaucracy of foreigners, culminating in the régime of Lord Curzon, when only about 4 per cent of the members of the Indian civil service were natives, was hardly a fulfillment of the spirit of this proclamation. Nor did the peoples of India consider it such. The spirit of unrest finally took shape in the Indian National Congress, founded in 1885, to give expression to the ideas of the educated classes; and this body soon came to be regarded as the unofficial Indian parliament. Each year it brought forward a list of ills which the government of India as then organized could not hope to remedy.

Who Ran the British Empire 1830-1850?

1965 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Taft Manning
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
British Empire ◽  
Colonial Administration ◽  
Historical Writing ◽  
The People ◽  
Mother Country ◽  
The Government ◽  
Colonial Office

Patterns of historical writing are notoriously difficult to change. Much of what is still being written about colonial administration in the nineteenth-century British Empire rests on the partisan and even malicious writings of critics of the Government in England in the 1830s and '40s who had never seen the colonial correspondence and were unfamiliar with existing conditions in the distant colonies. The impression conveyed in most textbooks is that the Colonial Office after 1815 was a well-established bureaucracy concerned with the policies of the mother country in the overseas possessions, and that those policies changed very slowly and only under pressure. Initially Edward Gibbon Wakefield and Charles Buller were responsible for this Colonial Office legend, but it was soon accepted by most of the people who had business to transact there. Annoyed by the fact that the measures proposed by the Wakefield group did not meet with instant acceptance, Wakefield and Buller attacked the Permanent Under-Secretary, James Stephen, as the power behind the throne in 14 Downing Street and assumed that his ideas of right and wrong were being imposed willy-nilly on the unfortunate colonists and would-be colonists.The picture of Stephen as all-powerful in shaping imperial policy was probably strengthened by the publication in 1885 of Henry Taylor's Autobiography. Taylor was one of Stephen's warmest admirers and had served with him longer than anyone else; when he stated that for a quarter of a century Stephen “more than any one man virtually governed the British Empire,” historians were naturally inclined to give credence to his words.

Adaptive Coexistence? Lord Farnham (1879–1957) and Southern Loyalism in Pre- and Post-Independence Ireland

2020 ◽  
pp. 293-314
Author(s):  
Jonathan Cherry
Keyword(s):  
Personal Experience ◽  
Free State ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
Agricultural Improvement ◽  
Personal Connections ◽  
Irish Free State ◽  
The Government

This chapter traces the career and experiences of Arthur Kenlis Maxwell, 11th Baron Farnham (1879-1957) of county Cavan as a southern loyalist in pre and post-independent Ireland. Up to 1920 he was a prominent representative of southern unionism and his impassioned speeches during the debate on the Government of Ireland bill convey the sense of abandonment and betrayal felt by many southern loyalists. In April 1922 he and his family left Farnham House for England. Unlike many of his peers who made similar journeys, Farnham returned to his ancestral home in 1926 and enjoyed a relatively peaceful and easy transition back into life there. The latter part of the chapter illustrates Farnham’s personal experience of adaptive coexistence and the complexity of southern unionist identities and loyalties in this ‘new’ Ireland. Personal connections made prior to his departure, his interest in agricultural improvement and promotion of various sports in Cavan had meant that he had cultivated a wide and diverse range of friends and networks which he could tap into on return. Although he never formally entered politics in the Irish Free State, Farnham remained an important leadership figure within the Protestant community in Cavan and further afield and symbolically maintained displays of his loyalism attending both the 1937 and 1953 coronations in London.

Northern Ireland and ‘Ulster Nationalism’

2020 ◽  
pp. 186-201
Author(s):  
David Torrance
Keyword(s):  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Free State ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
Republic Of Ireland ◽  
Irish Free State ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Uk

Many analysts of the politics of Northern Ireland have argued that there exists some form of ‘Ulster nationalism’, particularly among Ulster Unionists. After 1886, when Gladstone promised Home Rule for Ireland, Unionists fashioned an Ulster identity predicated on Protestantism and ‘loyalty’ to the British Crown. This was contrasted with the ‘disloyalty’ of Catholics in what would become the Republic of Ireland. This form of ‘nationalist unionism’ was more ethnic in character than the civic variety which existed in Scotland and Wales. It too contained contradictions, not least its suspicion of Westminster and paranoia as to the intentions of successive UK governments towards the constitutional status of Northern Ireland. At various points after 1921, some Ulster Unionists even toyed with the idea of Northern Ireland becoming a ‘Dominion’ (like the Irish Free State) or else pursuing some other form of ‘independence’ from the UK.

RACE, EMPIRE, AND THE LIMITS OF NINETEENTH-CENTURY SCOTTISH NATIONHOOD

2003 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 873-892 ◽  
Author(s):  
COLIN KIDD
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Racial Identity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Late Nineteenth Century ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
Anglo Saxon ◽  
War Of Independence ◽  
The People ◽  
Late Nineteenth

Scotland's Unionist culture has already become a world we have lost, investigation of which is hampered by the misleading notion of a ‘Celtic fringe’. Nineteenth-century Lowland Scots were not classified as Celts; indeed they vociferously projected a Teutonic racial identity. Several Scots went so far as to claim not only that the Saxon Scots of the Lowlands were superior to the Celts of the Highlands, but that the people of the Lowlands came from a more purely Anglian stock than the population of southern England. For some Scots the glory of Scottish identity resided in the boast that Lowlanders were more authentically ‘English’ than the English themselves. Moreover, Scottish historians reinterpreted the nation's medieval War of Independence – otherwise a cynosure of patriotism – as an unfortunate civil war within the Saxon race. Curiously, racialism – which was far from monolithic – worked at times both to support and to subvert Scottish involvement in empire. The late nineteenth century also saw the formulation of Scottish proposals for an Anglo-Saxon racial empire including the United States; while Teutonic racialism inflected the nascent Scottish home rule movement as well as the Udal League in Orkney and Shetland.

scholarly journals Historical revisit: Edmund Curtis, A history of medieval Ireland (1923, 1938)

1999 ◽  
Vol 31 (124) ◽  
pp. 535-548 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Lydon
Keyword(s):  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Free State ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
History Of ◽  
Irish Free State ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Medieval Ireland

These verses were written by the Irish poet to express his grief at the impact of the Williamite victory at the battle of the Boyne and all that followed for Ireland. They were chosen two hundred years later by the historian Edmund Curtis to make clear his attitude towards Ireland’s past. In 1923, just after home rule was secured for what was officially known as Saorstát Éireann (Irish Free State), he published his history of medieval Ireland, and where a dedication would normally be printed he inserted ‘The Absentee Lordship’ and followed it with these verses. In doing this, Curtis left no doubt that in his view medieval Ireland was a lordship wrongfully attached to the English crown and that it should rightfully have been a kingdom under its own native dynastic ruler. For this he was subsequently denounced as unhistorical, and to this day, especially in the view of the so-called revisionists, he is commonly regarded as not only out of date, but dangerous as well. It was argued that Curtis used the medieval past to justify the emergence of a self-governing state in Ireland. To quote just one example, Steven Ellis, the best of the medieval revisionists, wrote in 1987 that ‘historians like Edmund Curtis concentrated on such topics as friction between the Westminster and Dublin governments, the Gaelic revival, the Great Earl uncrowned king of Ireland, the blended race and the fifteenth-century home rule movement’.

Venereal disease in the Irish Free State: the politics of public health

2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (139) ◽  
pp. 345-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susannah Riordan
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
State Formation ◽  
Venereal Disease ◽  
Free State ◽  
Moral Regulation ◽  
Irish Government ◽  
Irish Free State ◽  
The Government

In his article ‘Venereal disease and the politics of prostitution in the Irish Free State’ Philip Howell argues that in 1926, following the submission of the Report of the interdepartmental committee of inquiry regarding venereal disease, the Irish government was confronted with ‘a series of proposals to regulate prostitution in the Free State’ These proposals are associated with the influence brought to bear by the army on the committee’s deliberations, and it is suggested that this preferred military solution to venereal disease falls into a European pattern in which state formation was frequently accompanied by such regulation. The example of Italy is offered as the most pertinent. However, Howell suggests, the government rejected the regulation of prostitution in favour of ‘a moral regulation of sexuality marked by elements of Catholic social purity’.

The Irish Free State passport and the question of citizenship, 1921–4

1989 ◽  
Vol 26 (104) ◽  
pp. 396-405 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph P. O’Grady
Keyword(s):  
British Empire ◽  
The Other ◽  
Central Issue ◽  
Free State ◽  
Equal Rights ◽  
The Status ◽  
Irish Free State ◽  
British Commonwealth ◽  
Direct Answer

The issue of citizenship played a major role in the negotiations that led to the Anglo-Irish treaty of 1921; but that point was overshadowed by the tendency of those who negotiated the treaty (and the authors who have written about it) to see the issue of ‘common citizenship’ as only one point under the heading of allegiance to the crown and membership of the British Empire. That it was a central issue is clear, however, for at one point in the 1921 negotiations Lloyd George asked, ‘to put it bluntly will you be British subjects or foreigners? You must be either one or the other.’ Arthur Griffith, the leader of the Irish delegation, answered: ‘in our proposal we have agreed to “reciprocity of civic rights”. We should be Irish and you would be British and each would have equal rights as citizens in the country of the other.’ That exchange caused the British to ask the Irish for a direct answer to the question, would they ‘acknowledge this common citizenship?’. The Irish, however, only responded with the words, ‘Ireland would undertake such obligations as are compatible with the status of a free partner’ in ‘the community of nations known as the British Commonwealth’. Those words did not satisfy the English negotiators, but in the end the Irish accepted an agreement in which the words ‘common citizenship’ appeared in the oath to the king which all members of Dáil Éireann would have to take. That satisfied the British demands on allegiance to the crown.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document