15.09.2013 Views

Dividing Ireland: World War I and Partition

Dividing Ireland: World War I and Partition

Dividing Ireland: World War I and Partition

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

60 IRELAND IN 1914<br />

However, some Southern Unionists, such as J.Mackay Wilson, urged<br />

the IUA policy of caution. Wilson based his argument upon the<br />

superficial nature of Irish Party loyalty. ‘Even if we give Mr.<br />

Redmond full credit for his somewhat belated effort of loyalty to<br />

the Empire’, he argued:<br />

Can Mr. Redmond speak for the great bulk of the Volunteers?<br />

If France were Engl<strong>and</strong>’s enemy, would we have a similar call<br />

to arms by Irish Nationalists? Surely, if the National<br />

Volunteers are to be recruited as guardians of these shores,<br />

some oath of allegiance to the King or some other test of<br />

loyalty will have to be administered? Once equipped with<br />

arms, Mr. Redmond would naturally (<strong>and</strong> who would blame<br />

him) use their extra power as a lever to carry a Home Rule<br />

Bill.<br />

All I suggest is that Irish Unionists wait a little. There are<br />

many ways we can help the cause of Empire, to which we have<br />

always been so devoted, <strong>and</strong> even be well-wishers of the<br />

National Volunteer movement without being too closely<br />

identified with it. Every Irish Unionist will hold out the h<strong>and</strong> of<br />

fellowship…provided always it is not called on for any terms<br />

or conditions, <strong>and</strong> that all controversial political differences<br />

be sunk for the time being in the face of the grave dangers<br />

we are suffering from. 75<br />

Within Nationalist <strong>Irel<strong>and</strong></strong> there were also dissenting voices. The<br />

most vocal opposition to Redmond’s home defence policy came<br />

from the Sinn Fein movement. Arthur Griffith warned Nationalists<br />

that an Engl<strong>and</strong> victorious in the war would be more powerful than<br />

at any time since the middle of the nineteenth century, <strong>and</strong> would<br />

treat <strong>Irel<strong>and</strong></strong>’s claim to nationhood dismissively. On the other h<strong>and</strong>,<br />

he feared that if Engl<strong>and</strong> lost, <strong>and</strong> <strong>Irel<strong>and</strong></strong> was identified with her<br />

cause, <strong>Irel<strong>and</strong></strong> would share in her punishment. 76 The analysis of<br />

Eoin MacNeill was that the Home Rule Bill was to be placed on the<br />

Statute Book ‘under a distinct underst<strong>and</strong>ing that the enemies of<br />

Home Rule will have a further <strong>and</strong> full opportunity to defeat the<br />

measures, altogether’. Only when the Bill was on the Statute Book<br />

would the decisive stage of the campaign be reached, <strong>and</strong> the<br />

defence of <strong>Irel<strong>and</strong></strong> would begin. ‘There is not much likelihood of a<br />

German invasion of our shores’, he pointed out, ‘But there is every<br />

certainty of an English invasion of our rights <strong>and</strong> liberties’. 77 Once<br />

signed, claimed Griffith, the Bill could see the calling of an Irish<br />

executive within forty-eight hours, <strong>and</strong> this would be a test as to<br />

whether the Bill, though signed, was intended to be

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!