Minute by Frederick H. Boland

Prior to my departure for London on the 2nd October, the Taoiseach asked me to endeavour to settle, while I was there, the question of the employment of the terms 'Ireland' and 'Éire' which had proved the subject of friction between the Irish and British delegations at the FAO Conference at Copenhagen. The Taoiseach told me he was not anxious that we should continue to have open controversies with the British on this matter at future international conferences, and he authorised me, if necessary, to agree to a compromise appellation on the lines of the formula used in the Anglo-Irish Air Agreement, viz., 'Ireland (Éire)' or 'Ireland/Éire'.

I took the matter up with Sir Eric Machtig at an early stage of our visit to London. I told him that we deplored the friction which had arisen at Copenhagen, but that the British delegation there had left us no option. Irishmen would never cease to call their country 'Ireland' and would never agree to accept the appellation 'Éire' in a context designed to imply acceptance of the fact of Partition. It was by insistence on irritants of this kind that the development of good relations between this country and Britain was prevented. I said that the Taoiseach was very anxious to avoid open controversy with British delegations on points of this kind at international conferences. We felt that at Copenhagen the controversy had been deliberately raised - apparently at the instigation of a Six County delegate - and that we had been placed in the position of having to accept a challenge. I reminded Sir Eric that, in our previous discussions of this point, the British argument had been based on the fact that, under British law, the title of this country was 'Éire'. We had met that argument by providing a special arrangement for bilateral agreements between ourselves and the British. We could not see the slightest justification, however, for the British attempt to propagate the appellation 'Éire' internationally simply on the ground that that was the term used in their internal legislation.

I urged Sir Eric Machtig to go into the whole matter and to see whether the attitude adopted by the British delegation at Copenhagen could not be revised. I told him that, so far as I could see, the only alternative was an endless vista of bickerings on the point between ourselves and the British at international conferences.

Sir Eric Machtig, who professed to have no detailed knowledge of what took place at Copenhagen, said he would look into the matter and speak to me about it again before we left London. When he had lunch with me on the 10th October, Sir Eric Machtig said that he had since been into the matter and that they thought that they could accept our point of view with regard to the use of the term 'Ireland'. The 'lawyers' had advised that British law was not involved and that, in any case, their position was adequately safeguarded by the use of the term 'United Kingdom' which, of course, related to 'Great Britain and Northern Ireland'. Sir Eric Machtig said that they had, accordingly, decided not to put in any amendment to the FAO Official Report before the 15th October, which was the final date for the purpose. He asked me not to regard this decision as quite final for the moment because they had not yet received the final concurrence of the Home Office which, of course, had to 'explain' the point to the Six County authorities. He thought, however, that the view he had expressed to me would be finally accepted.