The Irish Boundary Crisis and the Reshaping of British Politics: 1920-1925 by Charles Kevin Matthews The London School of Economics and Political Science A Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of London. 2000 UMI Number: U150458 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U150458 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 "Theses . F. 3 5 W - 5 ■ ABSTRACT This thesis investigates the interaction between the evolution of the Irish Question and the re-emergence of Britain's two-party political system after World War I. It challenges the contention summed up in A.J.P. Taylor's suggestion that David Lloyd George 'conjured' the Irish Question out of existence with the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921. Here, it is shown that on the contrary the Irish dispute continued to be a highly sensitive issue for successive British governments until the Treaty's Boundary Commission report was shelved in 1925. This was so because British politics was then undergoing a profound revolution. Its climax was the 1924 general election, which established the Conservatives as the dominant players in British politics, ensured Labour's place as the leading party of the left, and confirmed the eclipse of Liberalism. The first of this study's two aims is to set the Irish dispute within this wider context. Specifically, it examines how the answer to the Irish Question that was devised by Lloyd George and his Coalition partners was constructed and then dismantled as a result of this revolution. The second aim of this thesis is to demonstrate that the Boundary Commission was only one element in the Treaty's Ulster clauses, all of which were designed to bring about Ireland's re-unification. The intent was to exploit the financial restrictions of the 1920 Government of Ireland Act and thus pressure Ulster Unionists into joining a single Irish Parliament. This aspect has been overlooked in other studies, though it posed as serious a threat to Northern Ireland's survival as the Commission itself. iii CONTENTS Abstract i Contents iii Preface iv List of Maps vii A Note on Terminology, Citations, viii and Abbreviations Introduction 1 1 Lloyd George's Dilemma 19 2 The Treaty and After 64 3 The Churchill Dispensation 109 4 The Legacy of Bonar Law 157 5 Mr Baldwin Takes Charge 193 6 Labour's 'Troublesome Subject' 237 7 Heading for Irish Rocks 278 8 The Boundary Bill and its Aftermath 321 9 The Final Chapter 355 Conclusion 435 Appendices I Biographical Notes 443 II Articles of Agreement for a Treaty Between Great Britain and Ireland 471 III Birkenhead's letter to Balfour, 3 March 1922 478 Bibliography 481 PREFACE The field of Anglo-Irish history is both a crowded and, given its resonance in current-day politics, a sometimes dangerous place in which to tread. Nonetheless, one corner of this field has never been explored fully. The aim of this study is to place the settlement of the Irish Question in the 1920s within the context of the broader revolution which was taking place in British politics at that time and to show how each affected the other. It is, for example, difficult to understand David Lloyd George's handling of the 1921 Irish Treaty negotiations without taking into account the underlying purpose which was behind his decision to enter those talks in the first place: namely, his goal of merging the Conservative and Liberal wings of his Coalition government into a new political party. Yet, scholars have been curiously hesitant to analyse the negotiations from this perspective. Their disinclination to examine the interrelationship between developments in Ireland and at Westminster seems to intensify when it comes to writing about the post-independence period.1 It is almost as if an admission of Britain's continuing influence over Irish affairs is viewed as tantamount to xFor a recent example, see T. Garvin, 1922: The Birth of Irish Democracy (Dublin, 1996). V sustaining the larger country's domination over its smaller neighbour. For their part, historians of 1920s British politics have approached the Irish Question with a certain world-weariness. Their reluctance to delve into the subject suggests an aversion to the idea that the issue could have had as great and continuing an influence on Britain's public life. I am indebted to a number of people for making it possible to research and write this thesis. Even before my work formally began at the London School of Economics and Political Science, Jack Murray, Holly Buchanan, and the Rev. Canon William C. Neuroth generously assisted me in gathering together the foundation material on which this thesis is based. I owe an equal debt of gratitude to the Cummins and Malone families who welcomed me into their homes while I was in Dublin to work in the Irish archives. Michael Collins, nephew of the Irish independence leader, kindly shared a number of insights about his uncle and steered me away from several errors in my early research. My thanks also go to the Viscount Davidson and to his son-in-law, Richard Oldfield, for allowing me to quote from the unpublished correspondence of Joan Davidson and Stanley Baldwin. Equally, I wish to thank the many copyright holders for allowing me to quote from the letters, diaries, and other documents which I have researched. Dr Anthony Howe, John Barnes, and Ronald Brennan read drafts of my work at various stages and I am indebted to them for their advice. I also wish to thank the administrative secretaries of the LSE's Department of International History - especially Pat Christopher, Mary McCormick, Brigid Spillane, and Susanne Umerski - who were generous with their time, their expertise, and with their friendship. Without the help and guidance and, again, friendship of Larry Ward, and of Carole Simpson and Joanne Bourne of the LSE's Information Technology department, it would have been impossible for me to research and write this thesis using a computer. Their support was crucial. The staffs of all of the research institutes and libraries which I visited were unfailingly kind and often went out of their way to assist me in my work. In particular, I would like to thank the staff of the House of Lords Record Office; the Rev. Father Ignatius Fennessey, OFM, of the Franciscan Library, Killiney? and Godfrey Waller, supervisor of the manuscripts department at Cambridge University Library. Financing this work was not an easy task. I wish to thank the University of London's Central Research Fund and the Royal Historical Society for providing assistance which enabled me to undertake research in both Britain and Ireland over the past several years. My thanks also vii go to the LSE's Student Union Hardship Fund. Most of all, I wish to thank my mother, Florence Matthews, and my twin sister, Leah Kay Matthews. They have never lost faith in me, and they have always been there when I have needed them. I owe an equal, and equally unpayable, debt to Andrea Heatley for her understanding and for her patience over the past several years. Finally, I wish to thank my supervisor, Professor David Stevenson. His advice has been invariably accurate, his criticism has always been constructive, and his encouragement has been unfailing. Most of all, he allowed me to go my own way, to chart my own course, and for that I shall always be grateful. viii LIST OF MAPS A general map of Ireland 3 Northern Ireland in 1922 117 Map of Free State claims to Northern Ireland territory, based on Poor Law Unions 207 Proposed Boundary Commission award, 1925 398 A NOTE ON TERMINOLOGY CITATIONS. AND ABBREVIATIONS Works on Anglo-Irish history follow a number of different, sometimes contradictory rules when referring to political parties, factions, and organizations. Here, the terms 'Northern Ireland' and 'Ulster' are used interchangeably when referring to the six-county state. In the same way, 'Ireland' and 'Irish' is used interchangeably with 'Free State' and 'Free Stater' to refer to the 26-county state. Although the British Conservative Party was still officially the 'Unionist Party', it and its supporters are referred to as 'Conservative' or 'Tory' throughout. The term 'Unionist' is reserved for the Northern Ireland government and the supporters of partition, while 'Nationalist' has been employed as a generic term to refer to the supporters of Irish unification in both parts of the island. 'Imperial' is used interchangeably with 'British' as this was the fashion of the time. For the sake of brevity, secondary sources are given a full citation only on first reference. Thereafter, the source is cited by the author's last name and an abbreviated title. Unless otherwise noted, portions of quotes are emphasized or contain irregular spellings only when this is the case in the original text. A number of abbreviations are used in the footnotes and, occasionally, in the text. These abbreviations are listed below. Northern Ireland Cabinet documents are prefaced with PRONI to distinguish them from British Cabinet records. ABBREVIATIONS AC Austen Chamberlain Papers AJB-B Arthur James Balfour Papers, British Library AJB-S Arthur James Balfour Papers, Scottish Records Office BBK Lord Beaverbrook Papers BL Andrew Bonar Law Papers C.