CAB129-33 — Page 56

27

Page 56.

Printed for the Cabinet. March 1949

Copy No.

31

SECRET

C.P. (49) 48

4th March, 1949

CABINET

IRELAND: THE ANTI-PARTITION CAMPAIGN

MEMORANDUM BY THE HOME SECRETARY AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS

*

1. Our colleagues will remember that in the discussions last October and November about the consequences of the repeal of the External Relations (Executive Authority) Act, the Eire Ministers claimed to be moved by the friendliest feelings towards the United Kingdom and emphasised that the severance of the last link binding Eire to the Commonwealth was designed to improve our relations. Notwithstanding these professions the campaign against the partition of Ireland has been intensified over the past two or three months and we may expect the Eire Government and Opposition, with the powerful aid of some elements in the Roman Catholic Church, to join in seeking to demonstrate in this country, in other Commonwealth countries and in the United States that the United Kingdom Government are wilfully preventing the reunion of Ireland.

2. The recent General Election in Northern Ireland led to an increase in the anti-partition propaganda. Thus, Mr. Costello and other Eire Ministers launched an appeal for funds to support anti-partition candidates in Northern Ireland, and after the results had been declared the Eire High Commissioners in London and Canberra issued press statements claiming that the Election had been unfairly conducted. Again, Mr. Costello has threatened to use the weapons in the hands of Eire ruthlessly so long as the evil of partition continues, while Mr. MacBride has made frequent references to the wrongful occupation of part of Ireland by British troops and has stated that, though the Eire Government sympathise with the objects of the proposed Atlantic Pact, they cannot join in any military alliance with Great Britain so long as partition lasts. The Northern Ireland Government have also been criticised by Members of the Westminster Parliament on the ground that the Election was fought on a stale register and that opponents of the Government were denied freedom of speech.

3. It should be noted that in the Eire propaganda it is suggested that if partition were ended the Parliament and Government of Northern Ireland would be allowed to continue to exercise their present powers, and that only the powers now exercised from Westminster should be transferred to the Dail, in which there would, of course, be some representation of Northern Ireland. Eire is thus seeking to establish that the end of partition would mean no loss of independence by Northern Ireland and that the defence of the British Isles would be secured by the willingness of a United Ireland to join in the Atlantic Pact.

4. We have hitherto thought it right that the United Kingdom Government should officially ignore the Eire campaign, and the Prime Minister in reply to a Parliamentary Question on 8th February (Hansard, col. 190) refused to make any protest to the Eire Government about their alleged interference in the Northern Ireland Election. Sir Basil Brooke has, however, addressed a letter to the Prime Minister pointing out that the statements made by Eire are an incitement Pagiolsce byth sides, and suggesting (i) that the agendan

36671

2

Government should let the Eire Government know that they will not tolerate a continuange offthe policy of threats and incitement Pirected against a part of the United Kingdom, and (ii) that at the first suitable opportunity the Prime Minister should make a public declaration condemning Eire's interference in the affairs of Northern Ireland and expressing the United Kingdom Government's determination to see to it that the citizens of Northern Ireland need have no ground for apprehension.

5. While we deplore the action taken by Eire Ministers and sympathise with Sir Basil Brooke's apprehensions, we are satisfied that any protest addressed to the Eire Government would merely lead to a rebuff and encourage Eire Ministers to intensify the campaign even further.

On the question of assurances to Northern Ireland, we believe that the most effective action would be the publication of the Ireland Bill with its declaration that Northern Ireland remains part of His Majesty's dominions and of the United Kingdom and its affirmation that in no event will Northern Ireland or any part thereof cease to be part of His Majesty's dominions and of the United Kingdom without the consent of the Parliament of Northern Ireland.

This declaration and affirmation would no doubt be underlined by the Govern- ment spokesman in the Second Reading debate on the Bill and it might on that occasion prove necessary to indicate that British forces would be used to defend Northern Ireland against armed aggression just as much as they would be used in the defence of, say, Kent. At the same time it could be made clear that British troops were present in Northern Ireland not to coerce the inhabitants of Northern Ireland but to ensure that the will of the majority was not overridden by pressure from outside the United Kingdom.

6. For the reasons given in C.P. (49) 47 we realise that it would be inexpedient to introduce this Bill before the Easter Recess and it may be that in the interval before then some new development in the Eire campaign will compel us to give Northern Ireland some public assurance of the kind suggested by Sir Basil Brooke. If, however, no such development takes place we recommend to our colleagues :-

(i) that no protest should be made to the Eire Government about their anti-

partition propaganda;

(ii) that any assurance to Northern Ireland should be given in the

proceedings on the Ireland Bill; and

(iii) that the Prime Minister should reply to Sir Basil Brooke's letter

accordingly.

4th March, 1949.

J. C. E.

P. J. N.-B.