CAB129-33 — Page 50

ELLAAR MOET

201

Printed for the Cabinet. March 1949

Page 50

SECRET

C.P. (49) 47.

4th March, 1949.

-ཧ 4.

CABINET

L

Copy No. 31

IRELAND BILL

MEMORANDUM BY THE PRIME MINISTER

THE Cabinet should be aware of developments which have taken place since they considered a provisional draft of the Ireland Bill (C.P. (49) 5) on 12th January (C.M. (49) 1st Conclusions, Minute 2).

--

i

2. Date of Introduction of Bill-At that time it was understood that the Eire Government would bring the Republic of Ireland Act into operation on 21st January; and it was contemplated that our consequential legislation should be introduced and passed, as a matter of urgency, as soon as Parliament reassembled after the Christmas recess. At the last moment, however, the Eire Government decided that their Act should not be brought into operation until Easter Monday (18th April), the anniversary of the Easter Rising of 1916. I considered with the Ministers immediately concerned whether we should proceed with our Bill as originally proposed, providing for it to come into operation on an appointed day. There would have been some advantages in this course, particularly from the point of view of the Parliamentary time-table. But we all felt that the balance of advantage lay on the side of waiting until the Eire legislation had actually been brought into operation especially as it should be made abundantly clear that it is the Eire Government themselves who, by their own action, have taken Eire out of the Commonwealth. We wish to give no one any pretext for representing that the United Kingdom Government have taken any initiative in the direction of thrusting Eire out of the Commonwealth.

J

I therefore recommend that the Ireland Bill should not be introduced until after the Easter Recess.

1

A

3. King's Title The Cabinet agreed that, subject to His Majesty's pleasure and to the views of other Commonwealth Governments, the Ireland Bill should include provision for changing the Royal Style and Titles by substituting Northern Ireland" for Ireland. I ascertained that His Majesty would not object to this change and the proposal was put to the other Commonwealth Governments. All save Canada and Pakistan concurred in the change and under- took to promote corresponding legislation in their Parliaments. The Prime Ministers of Canada and Pakistan have, however, raised objections which they cannot be persuaded to withdraw.

CC

C.C

➡

5

Certain sections of Canadian opinion have for some time past been dis- satisfied with the fact that Canada is included in the Royal Title only under the general description of British Dominions overseas and particular objection is taken to the Latin version of that phrase sub ditione Britannica." The Canadian Government are under a pledge to their Parliament to take an early opportunity of raising, at a Commonwealth Conference, the question of a general change in the King's Title. They therefore felt that it would be politically impossible for them to promote in their Parliament legislation dealing with th88 King's Title winch was confined to the simple change of substituting Northern Ireland" for "Ireland." While, therefore, they would not object if other

36665

wor

2

Commonwealth&overnments made this limited change they would not themselves do more than announce that the expression "Great Britain and Ireland 22 was no longer appropriate in view of Eire's change of status and that proposals for removing that anomaly and other existing anomalies in the Title would be laid before their Parliament in due course after the question of a more general change in the Title had been discussed with other Commonwealth Governments.

The Prime Minister of Pakistan is satisfied that he could not introduce legislation authorising this limited change in the King's Title without arousing a constitutional controversy which would be extremely embarrassing to his Government at the present time. He thinks it would be impossible for him to convince either his Constituent Assembly or his people generally that Pakistan, by remaining within the Commonwealth, would enjoy advantages substantially greater than those secured by Eire. In these circumstances he has asked that legislation affecting the King's Title should be deferred until the whole question can be fully examined.

4. It would be unsatisfactory for the United Kingdom Government to introduce legislation authorising this change in the King's Title knowing that two of the other Commonwealth Governments were not prepared to introduce corresponding legislation. It is also undesirable that frequent changes should be made in the King's Title. As the Cabinet will be aware, there will probably be an opportunity to discuss, early in the summer, the question of a general change in the Title; and, if agreement were then reached on some general change, further legislation would be necessary. In all the circumstances I consider that the best course will be to abandon the proposal for making the limited change of substitu- ting "Northern Ireland" for Ireland." There will be no difficulty in explain- ing to other Commonwealth Governments our reasons for this change of plan. And, if the introduction of the Ireland Bill is postponed until after the Easter Recess, the fact that the Bill makes no provision on this point will probably be more easily explained then than it would have been earlier in the year.

.60

I therefore recommend that no provision should be included in the Ireland Bill for a change in the King's Title.

5. Title of Eire.-On 12th January the Cabinet agreed that the Ireland Bill should formally recognise "the Republic of Ireland" as a statutory description of the country hitherto known as Eire, but that in official usage the description "the Irish Republic" should be more commonly employed. Since then I have had a further discussion with the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland, who has urged very strongly that the expression "the Irish Republic" should be used in the Ireland Bill. His argument is that the Eire Government have used the description "Republic of Ireland" in furtherance of their claim to jurisdiction over the whole of Ireland; and that the recognition of that title by the Parliament at Westminster would be regarded in the North as implying recognition of that claim and suggesting that Partition was only a temporary arrangement. He also argues that, if legislation passed by the Parliament at Westminster gives coun- tenance to the title "Republic of Ireland," this will greatly increase the difficulty of preventing "Ireland" from coming into common use in the United Kingdom as a description of the South. He admits that the provisions to be included in the Ireland Bill, as now drafted, would not, as a matter of law, give any support to this claim of the Eire Government; but he is gravely concerned at the feeling which may be aroused in the North if Eire Ministers seek to misrepresent the significance which is to be attached to the fact that the term "Republic of Ire- land" has been used in United Kingdom legislation. He therefore urges that, even if the Ireland Bill must begin by referring to the title ("Republic of Ire- land '') used in the Eire legislation, all subsequent references in the Bill should be to" the Irish Republic."

་

4

•

:

6. I have considered this suggestion very carefully, in consultation with the Ministers directly concerned, and have received the advice of Parliamentary Counsel. I am satisfied that it would be quite inappropriate, in legislation conse- quential upon an Eire Act which provides that the twenty-six counties shall in future be known as the Republic of Ireland," to make ostentatious use of the alternative title "the Irish Republic." Ministers defending the Bill would find it Rageulto Explain publicly the significant differenlagah vitessees between Republic of Ireland and the adjective "Irish Republic

Irish Republic"; and this

the noun

CC

,,

65

A

3

refusal to Peagnise the4 8i8le which the South has chosen Pogeitself fwold be regarded as a policy of pin-pricks, for which we could expect neither sympathy nor support from other Commonwealth Governments. Moreover, a refusal to use the title Republic of Ireland" in any circumstances would involve us in con- tinuing friction with the Eire Government: it would perpetuate the inconveniences and indignities which we now experience as a result of our present policy of insisting on the title "Eire" as against Dublin's preference for

Ireland.""

7. I therefore recommend that the Ireland Bill should formally recognise the title "6 Republic of Ireland as a description of the twenty-six counties. Subject to this, however, some concessions can be made to meet the views of the Northern Ireland Government. First, we should undertake that in official usage we will also employ the description the Irish Republic." Secondly, we should so amend Clause 1 of the Ireland Bill that the first reference to the Republic of Ireland " appears as a reference to the title which the Eire Government, have themselves chosen as a description of the twenty-six counties. Thirdly, we should in the Ireland Bill describe the twenty-six counties as "the part of Ireland hitherto known as Eire.

8. The Westminster Franchise.-On 12th January the Cabinet asked me to make a further attempt to persuade the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland to reduce the residential qualification for the franchise for the Northern Ireland Parliament (e.g., from seven to five years) in return for the introduction of a residential qualification of three months for the exercise in Northern Ireland of the Westminster franchise.

·

I have had a further discussion with Sir Basil Brooke on this point. He has assured me that his Government gave the most careful consideration to this pro- posal, and would have been glad if they could have helped the Home Secretary to meet the criticisms which are likely to be raised at Westminster by any pro- posal to amend the law in relation to elections in Northern Ireland. They were satisfied, however, that it would be politically impossible for them to put this proposal before their Parliament at the present time. As their law now stands, the franchise for their Parliament is limited to British subjects of full age who were either born in Northern Ireland or have resided in the United Kingdom for the seven years immediately preceding the qualifying date. The second part of this qualification was deliberately designed to prevent Eire citizens from exercising the franchise in Northern Ireland until they had identified themselves with the United Kingdom by a substantial period of residence there. The need for this protection would not be diminished indeed, it would actually be increased-by Eire's change of status. The Northern Ireland Government feel very strongly that the electorate for their Parliament should be truly representa- tive of Northern Ireland; and that the moment at which Eire leaves the Common- wealth is certainly not an appropriate time at which to propose any relaxation of safeguards which were thought necessary even when Eire was within the Commonwealth.

'.

9. I find it difficult to resist these arguments. There is a good case on the merits for imposing a three-months' residence qualification for the exercise of the Westminster franchise in Northern Ireland; and I propose, with the con- currence of the Home Secretary, that we should include a provision to this effect in the Ireland Bill, even though the Northern Ireland Government are unable to promise any reduction in the period of the residence qualification for the franchise for the Northern Ireland Parliament.

10. Draft of Ireland Bill.-If the Cabinet approve my proposals in principle, a revised draft of the Ireland Bill will be submitted for detailed examination by the Legislation Committee. The Bill can then be held in readiness for introduction at an appropriate moment after the Easter Recess.

11. Summary. The recommendations made in this memorandum may be summarised as follows:-

(a) The Ireland Bill should not be introduced until after the Easter Recess

(paragraph 2).

(b) It should not include any provision for a change in The King's Title

(paragraph 488.

25

Page 53...

4

66

Page 53 (e) It should formally recognise the title. Republic of Ireland" as the description of the part of Ireland heretofore known as Eire, although in official usage the description the Irish Republic" will also be employed (paragraph 7).

C

(d) it should include a provision imposing a three-months residence qualification for the exercise of the Westminster franchise in Northern Ireland, even though the Northern Ireland Government are not prepared to reduce the period of the residence qualification for the franchise for the Northern Ireland Parliament (paragraph 9).

i

1

10, Downing Street, S. W. 1, 4th March, 1949.

C. R. A