AN IRISH NAVY AND THE TREATY OF 1921 [To the
Editor of THE SPECTATOR.]
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
[Correspondents are requested to keep their letters as brief as is reasonably possible. The most suitable length is that of one of our " News of the Week " paragraphs. Signed letters are given a preference over those bearing a pseudonym.—Ed. THE SrEc-rAroa.) rt,—The intimation given by the delegate of the Irish Free State at the Naval Conference that his government rejects the principle of treating the whole of the forces of the members of the British Commonwealth as a unit for purposes of naval limitation is of no great international importance. The Free State is not in a position to construct a large fleet and doubtless has no present intention of doing so.
On the other hand the statement serves as a reminder to the British government and the public that the Free State is not disposed to accept any limitation on its freedom of action, and that it no longer intends to remain satisfied with the position established under the treaty that naval defence is a matter for the British Navy.
Mr. Cosgrave's government was content to leave this question alone and took no steps to secure the review of the position under the terms of Article 6 of the treaty of 1921. It is, however, clear that Mr. de Valera cannot consistently adopt the attitude of his predecessor, and that the British government is not in a position to refuse to admit that the Free State has the same right to establish an independent navy as has the Commonwealth of Australia.
It is, however, clearly of the first importance that there should be a definite understanding between the governments regarding co-operation in war, for the Anglo-German agreement of June 18th, 1935, accords to Germany the right to possess naval tonnage equal to thirty-five per cent. of the aggregate of the actual tonnages of the members of the British Commonwealth, an agreement based on the view then held that the tonnage—if any—of the Irish navy could be reckoned fairly as British tonnage. That agreement is intended to be permanent and definite ; it allows no great margin of safety, in view of the necessary dispersion of British naval power, and it might be dangerous, should the Free State ever decide to embark on substantial construction without undertaking to support the United Kingdom in case of attack.
It should not be impossible to achieve accord with the Free State. The latter resents as incompatible with its international status the presence on its territory of British forces as provided under the treaty. According to the decision of the Privy Council in Moore v. Attorney-General for the Irish Free State (1935 A.C. 484), the Irish legislature possesses the power to deprive the clauses of the treaty of all legal effect in the Free State, and within a month the Senate will cease to exist. There will then be no legal barrier to the enactment of provisions by the Irish legislature which would render illegal the presence of British forces on Free State territory and the exercise of authority over such forces by their officers. It is true that the Supreme Court of the Free State prior to the judgement of the Privy Council held that the treaty provisions could not be altered by the legis- lature, but it is very doubtful whether the court would now uphold that view and deny to the Free State legislature, powers ascribed to it by the Privy Council. Moreover the court is clearly undermanned, and it would be easy to add to it members who would uphold the authority of the legis- lature.
Such action, of course, would seem to be a breach of the treaty, but Mr. de Valera would be able to appeal to the language of the Privy Council which suggests that the Statute of Westminster, 1931, was intended to give power to supersede the treaty, and in any event a dispute on this subject would profit neither side.
Surely the time has come when a determined effort might be made to revise the treaty of 1921 and to secure in economies and politics alike that co-operation between the United Kingdom and the Free State which is dictated by fundamental considerations of common interest.—I am, &c.,
Previous page
