Part 8 of a History of Ireland
Ulster Volunteers |
By 1911, Ulster Protestants had recognised that they could not continue to oppose Home Rule for the rest of Ireland but this realisation made them all the more determined to defend Ulster against inclusion in a Catholic-dominated independent state.
The Ulster Defence Force was formed and armed specifically to fight this, to Protestants, unthinkable prospect. If Ulster Protestants had anything to be proud of it was their history in defending the faith against Catholicism and defending their way of life.
These were the descendants of those who carves a living out of the wild lands in the north, who refused to surrender at Londonderry and who saved Britain from the curse of the Whore of Babylon at the Boyne and Augrim. They were also the descendants of those who were massacred at Porterdown Bridge. They were the people for whom the annual celebration of these great victories was an important event in the calendar. In the words of Lord Randolph Churchill, Ulster would fight and Ulster would be right. No Surrender!
However, even Carson has conceded that they could not reasonably defend all of the historic nine counties, three of which has large Catholic majorities. The loss of these three counties was to be the final concession; not one more inch of Ulster would be freely given up.
Sir Edward Carson Addressing the Ulster Volunteer Force, Balmoral, July 1913 |
Sir Edward Carson and James Craig |
The IRA had never, at its most nationalistic fringe, accepted the Free State as the independent and united Ireland they had fought for, and saw those who did accept it as traitors to the cause. It had fought on, precipitating the new state into a bloody civil war, and had the declared aim of uniting all Ireland, by force of arms if necessary. By 1932, the former leader of Sinn Fein, de Valera, was Chief Executive of the Dail.
Crowds Gather to Watch the Riots Royal Avenue and North Street, Belfast 22 May 1922 |
Whilst Unionists built and secured their new state the Catholic population in the north (about thirty percent of the population) remained mostly Nationalist. Their elected representatives continued the tradition of refusing to sit in a parliament they did not recognise and Catholic school managers refused state grants. A third of the population were refusing to recognise the state itself and instead owed allegiance to one controlled by the enemy south of the border. Nationalist politicians continued to boycott the Northern Ireland Parliament until 1925 but thereafter, to Ulster Protestants, they were never an opposition group in a democratic parliament, simply determined to get rid of the government and replace it with another one. Instead, they were determined to get rid of the state altogether.
Stormont Castle |
Sir James Craig, second left. |
...far more than I do being Prime Minister... I have always said I am an Orangeman first and a politician and a Member of Parliament afterwards... all I boast is that we are a Protestant parliament and a Protestant state”.
From it’s inception until its abolition by Britain, a single party controlled Stormont and every Prime Minister had been in the Cabinet of the former one. Each one too had been a senior member of an Orange Order. Ulster was effectively a single-party state, and its senior government figures were all members of a secretive organisation that required its members to swear an oath of opposition to Catholicism. Stormont was the tool of the Orange Orders and the instrument through which these secret societies ran Ulster. Inevitably, such absolute power led to abuses of that power.
It was at local government level where Unionist power was most blatantly abused, however. The deep insecurities of Protestants had led them to accept, almost without question, as though it were God’s will that they should be doing it, a regime which hardly even paid lip-service to the idea of democracy. Not content to be in the majority throughout much of the province, they proceeded to establish electoral rules and electoral boundaries in such as way that, even when locally in a minority, they could continue to hold power by an overwhelmingly large majority of seats on local councils. Protestants saw this as their just deserts whilst Catholics saw it as the discrimination it really was.
In Londonderry, the Catholic population formed some sixty percent of the population. For fifty years however, the Londonderry Corporation was sixty percent Unionist and forty percent Nationalist. This was achieved in two main ways. Firstly, 87 percent of Catholics were placed in a single ward returning just eight councillors whilst 87 percent of the Protestants were in two wards which returned twelve councillors and this was facilitated by a system of apportioning housing to designated Catholic and Protestant areas. Secondly, the council was voted in, not based on one person, one vote, but by a system whereby only those with a residence could vote, effectively restricting the vote to the head of the household. However, the value of the property was also taken into account so that a wealthy person could have up to six votes to be distributed amongst his nominees. In a population where Unionists were by far the wealthier, this gave Unionist supporters a far larger electoral advantage than Nationalists had. This advantage was used to reinforce the system still further by discriminatory housing allocation practices.
Londonderry Corporation annually delegated its powers to a housing committee that in turn delegated them to the Protestant Mayor of the city. He then allocated housing in a manner befitting a Protestant mayor in a Protestant City, and was accountable to no one but himself. Similar abuses were to be found in other areas of Northern Ireland. In Dungannon, the population was split about half-and-half Catholic and Protestant, yet the council regularly had fourteen Unionist and just seven Nationalist councillors. In East County Down where the population was similarly split, there were nineteen Unionist councillors and just five Nationalists. Discrimination naturally extended to employment with the local council. In County Fermanagh, there were eighty-eight Protestant school bus drivers and only seven Catholic ones, yet Catholics formed twenty-six percent of the population. Ninety-seven and a half percent of Belfast City Council employees were Protestant, and so on. Yet Unionist politicians continued to deny that there was discrimination.
These abuses were carried out, and allowed by Britain, despite Proportional Representation having been put into the 1920 Government of Ireland Act. Stormont had abolished this for local elections, in 1922. The same Act also contained a clause forbidding discrimination on religious grounds and a clause reserving full powers of sovereignty to Westminster.
So where did the blame for these blatant abuses of power lie? Britain had looked on, fully aware that the 1920 Act was being flouted by Stormont so must share a large portion of the blame. Stormont itself has to bear its share of the responsibility, since it decided, as a matter of Unionist policy, that discrimination should be the established norm in Northern Ireland despite the Act. Is it sufficient to put this down to the insecurity of a beleaguered people, fearing minority status in their own lands? Protestants certainly felt they were justified in acting the way they did. Was the south partly to blame for having a constitution that was overtly threatening to the northern Protestants?
The answer of course is that ALL parties have a share in it. The south, for example, cannot both claim to be indifferent to what was happening and to have sovereignty for that part of the island. There was no threat to them that they needed an overtly Catholic constitution that posed a threat to the north. It simply increased the insecurities of northern Protestants and did nothing for the southern Catholics apart from giving a rather nebulous form of recognition of the ‘special status’ of the Catholic Church. It did mean that, if the Republic were ever in a position to assert its claimed sovereignty, Protestants would become subject to divorce and family planning laws that they would find unacceptable. Then why should the south bee too concerned about what people in the north thought anyway? They were building the state they had always wanted. It would be distinctly Irish, and they were in no mood to compromise just to placate hostile northern Protestants.
Westminster however, had little to gain from allowing the abuses to continue and she had the powers to prevent them. So why were they allowed to continue for so long? To an extent, Britain was happy to turn a blind eye because Ireland, for so long a problem, was now running its own affairs, albeit with two different parliaments. Britain was glad to be rid of the responsibility. The Irish could sort their own problems out.
The other major factors was the useful political support the main party of government received from Unionists, who sat on the Conservative benches in the Commons. This was the Conservative Party of Arthur Bonar Law who had declared, in 1912, that there were no lengths to which Ulster would go in which he would not support them. Ulster was to be a Protestant State for a Protestant people, and if the Catholics did no like it, well, they could always move over the border. Besides, when Britain stood alone against the Nazis, Ulster had thrown herself into the war effort with enthusiasm, whilst the south had opted for neutrality and, at times, a rather too cosy relationship with Germany and Japan. These were our people while the people they discriminated against owed allegiance to our former enemies in the south. Protestants were defending a part of Britain from those who sought to take it from us. They were our friends; indeed, they and Ulster were part of Britain.
Besides, the certainty of a large block of Conservative-supporting MPs being returned to Westminster by Ulster at each election was not to be sniffed at, especially by the Conservative and Unionist Party, as the Conservative Party was officially called. A neatly convenient arrangement whereby the main right-wing party got as large clutch of right-wing MPs through a rigged electoral process which they could claim was nothing to do with them.
No comments :
Post a Comment
Obscene, threatening or obnoxious messages, preaching, abuse and spam will be removed, as will anything by known Internet trolls and stalkers, by known sock-puppet accounts and anything not connected with the post,
A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Remember: your opinion is not an established fact unless corroborated.