The Controversies surrounding the treaty negotiations 1921.
#625Lab – History, marked 80/100, detailed feedback at the very bottom. You may also like: Leaving Cert History Guide (€).
Essay credit: Ciara McCarthy
The truce of the war of Independence on 11th July 1921 brought a new atmosphere of peace to Ireland. As talks of negotiations were rumoured to be happening, people in Ireland rejoiced. The result of these negotiations would prove to be one of the most controversial time periods in Irish history. The controversies began before the delegation left on the boat for London in October 8th 1921 and continued well after the treaty had been signed. These negotiations which offered much hope to the Irish people after 700 years of tyranny, ultimately tore the cabinet, the Dáil, the army and eventually the cabinet apart.
The controversies began when the delegates were being chosen. Eamon de Valera as president and more importantly a skilled negotiator was expected to lead the delegation, however when the cabinet met he astonished them by announcing he would not go to London.This is extremely controversial as de Valera was a brilliant negotiator, even Lloyd George described how as ‘one of the best political manipulators of all time’ and also said that ‘to negotiate with him was like trying to pick up mercury with a fork’. De Valera had two reasons for doing this. He stated that if he remained at home he could control the military republicans. Also as president, the delegates would have to refer all British proposals back to him in Dublin, which would give them an excuse for not signing anything under the pressure of Lloyd George.
I agree with historians like Joe Lee who believed that de Valera did not go to London because he knew that a Republic was not achievable and he did not want to be held accountable for not giving the Irish people a republic. de Valera and his ministers had gone to London on 14 July to meet with Lloyd George. de Valera told him that Sinn Fein wanted to end partition and have a totally independent republic for the whole of Ireland. Lloyd George refused to even discuss these demands, which adds more controversy to why de Valera did not partake in the negotiations. There is further controversy over how reluctant Michael Collins was to go. In 1963 de Valera wrote a letter claiming that Collins had been ‘upset’ not to have been included in the first trip to London in July 1921.
The next major controversy surrounded the actual powers the delegates were given. On the 7th of October 1921, the cabinet gave ambiguous instructions to the chosen delegates, which included Griffith, Collins, Robert Barton, two layers Eamonn Duggan and Gavan Duffy with Erskine Childers as secretary. Erskine Childers selection also caused controversy at the time as the other delegates saw him as de Valeras spy and deeply mistrusted him. The dial appointed the delegates as plenipotentiaries ‘with full powers as defined in their credentials’. Controversially point two and three in their written instructions contradicted this. The instructions signed by de Valera stated that ‘before decisions were made on the main questions that a despatch notifying the intention of Making these decisions will be sent to the members of cabinet in Dublin and that a reply will be awaited by plenipotentiaries before the final decision is made’. These instructions could be interpreted in many ways, which led to major controversy when the treaty was signed without cabinet approval on December 6th 1921.
The negotiations in London were also very controversial from the moment they sat for their first meeting on 11am on 11th of October 1921 ‘facing one of the most formidable political teams that England ever assembled’(T.P Coogan). This included Lloyd George, Winston Churchill, Austin Chamberlain and Lord Birkenhead. The location of the talks was controversial. The British were on home ground and this gave them an advantage straight away. The Irish were staying away from home with a small team and had to travel back and forth many times during the two months they were there. The disparity in experience and resource between the two delegations was clear and Irish delegations were often out of their depth. The team missed de Valera. Collins particularly hated every minute of the negotiations. Lloyd George once said that Collins looked like ‘he was going to shoot someone… preferably himself’.
Arthur Griffiths part in the negotiations is surrounded by controversy. On Sunday October 30th he was negotiation on his own with Lloyd George about the issue of partition. Lloyd George confined in him that he was under pressure from the Conservative party in the House of Commons and needed some written statement from the Irish. Griffith agreed to write a letter saying he would agree to Ireland recognising the king as head of state of Ireland got a 32 county parliament. Lloyd George promised he would talk to James Craig and try to persuade him and if he couldn’t he would resign. It was a brilliant move by the English because the letter was legal document showing the Irish agreed to recognise the king but Lloyd George has made no written statement.
It weakened Ireland’s hand massively. James Craig refused to even talk to Lloyd George. On 8 November Lloyd George’s secretary, Tom Jones visited Griffith and Collins to tell them this. He stated that Lloyd George could keep his promise and resign, but if he did the next prime minister would be a Conservative who would be even less sympathetic to nationalists. He then suggested the setting up of a Boundary commission. Among the Irish delegation the letter caused ‘uproar’, especially when they found out Griffith hadn’t even written the letter. It was drafted by Tom Jones and Griffith merely signed it.
The controversy did not end after the treaty the treaty was signed. de Valera was furious that the terms of the treaty has been published and controversially came out against the treaty in December 9th. This broke a tradition that all disagreements in the cabinet were confidential. There was more controversy when de Valera and his supporters rejected the democratic vote of the Dail (64 to 57 in favour) and walked out of the Dáil. They felt betrayed while the pro treaty side felt abandoned. These feelings soon turned to anger and it was inevitable that a vicious and brutal civil war was fought between June 1922 and May 1923, with de Valera taking the view that ‘if death should come to many of us, death is not the end’.
The 1921 treaty negotiations are no doubt surrounded by controversy. In looking back at them we can see that Eamon de Valera’s decision not to take part in the negotiations and his instructions to the delegates were central to this controversy. When he walked out of the Dáil on the 9th of December 1921 he divided the county.The civil war that followed lead to massive blood shed and hate between Irish people who had just one year previous been fighting together. de Valera himself stated that ‘in the fullness of time, history will record the greatness of Michael Collins and it will be recorded at my expense’.
Feedback: This is a really well-written essay. Each paragraph is packed full of relevant and accurate information which supports your points, and you maintain a really tight focus on the question. It’s really good to use historical quotations from people like de Valera, and to mention historians like Joe Lee so keep that up! You make some really good comments on the information you’re presenting, like when you comment on why de Valera might have made the plenipotentiaries report back to him.
Your introduction is very strong as it answers the question and gives a little bit of background but I would suggest using words like ‘tyranny’, as it can be read as a bit biased/ subjective and regardless of your personal opinion, a history essay should be objective.
Your conclusion is also really strong as it wraps up your argument while also adding a little bit more to the essay, and it’s nice that you ended with a quotation.
Keep an eye on your grammar though – make sure you capitalise de Valera when it’s at the start of a sentence, and make sure that you correctly use possessive apostrophes (for example, you have Griffiths when it should be Griffith’s). I’d also say avoid personal statements like ‘I agree with…’ and rephrase these opinions as objective statements like ‘Many people believe…’.
Cumulative Mark: 50/60 – one or two more paragraphs of this standard would get you up to 60 easily.
Overall Evaluation: 30/40
Total Mark: 80/100