Letter from Joseph P. Walshe to Frederick H. Boland (Dublin)
(Most Secret)

I enclose a copy of a letter received from Mgr. Tardini on the 13th January with the two references mentioned in the letter. I also enclose a copy of a letter written by me to the Monsignor the day following his first mention of the matter.

The situation, in view of the material now furnished seems to me to be indefensible. When these two representatives of the Red Cross were going to Yugoslavia I told them they should endeavour to bring back information about the real situation which could be of help to the Govt. and to the Holy See. A few questions put to them on their return made it clear that they did not feel too happy about the situation. It is too late to mend matters now except by getting Fr. O'Connor to make an early statement rectifying his original talk to the Press. I have an appointment with Mgr. T. tomorrow and shall let you know immediately what he proposes to do. It might be better for a lot of reasons to allowed it to be dealt with entirely within the ecclesiastical sphere and to keep the Govt and the Red Cross out of it. At the same time it is clear Mgr. T. believes we could have taken a hand in the matter, and secured more experienced representatives for such a delicate task. The Red Cross do not seem to be sufficiently aware of the harm that can be done by sending innocent Irish Catholics into countries where are so many expert propagandists waiting to trap them into becoming innocent abettors of their attitude towards the Church. You will remember that I was puzzled from the beginning that I was left completely in the dark about the purpose of the visit and the extent of their mandate. Dr. Hourihane, especially, seemed to wish to give me the impression that Mr. Brady¹ had obtained a sort of general mandate from the Taoiseach for himself and the other delegates to act as quasi Govt. agents for the purpose of making a general investigation and reporting to the Govt. He followed up this by relying on a conversation he had had for a few moments with Mr. Cremin who, he said, told him to make a general survey report. Indeed I found it difficult to let Hourihane see that, here at any rate, I was in charge of everything that even remotely affected the State's relations with the Holy See; and I tried to show him that every word said by the Delegates was of importance in that respect. For that reason I invited them to stay with me so that, at least during their sojourn in Italy, they would be under my immediate control. The thesis that Red Cross delegates can go abroad in present circumstances in a kind of general representative capacity would hardly be accepted by the Vatican. We have a duty to exercise supervision over such people and the performance of the two delegates in Yugoslavia is a proof of the absolute necessity of doing so. Dr. Hourihane's statement on leaving that country leaves us somewhat in the soup though the Vatican won't know I hope, that he was a State servant on loan to the Red Cross. Incidentally I believe that the account of Hourihane's speech in the Yugoslav papers is authentic because he said to me before leaving here finally, that he hoped his speech on leaving Yugoslavia would not appear in the press at home. I am not complaining in sending you this most secret note. I know the enormous difficulties we are labouring under with regard to staff. My own experience is a reflection of yours. But unless we quite frankly examine such situations as they arise and assess them in all their full objective gravity, the foreign policy and the instructions and wishes of the Taoiseach will be impossible to carry out.

Let us look frankly at the result of this incident in its true background. I have been labouring without ceasing since I came here to build up our reputation with the Holy See. That was my absolute duty and I claim no credit for it. The Taoiseach has made that task enormously easier by his factual backing ? especially and most recently by the Dáil Resolution in relation to the persecution of the Church in Eastern Europe. Two gentlemen come out from Ireland apparently armed with at least derivative Governmental authority. They act with such imprudence and folly in the very centre of the area affected by the persecution as to have damaged to a certain extent, at any rate, the whole Campaign against the persecution, of which the Dáil resolution was one of the most important elements! The bricks in the edifice of the Taoiseach's policy in relation to the Vatican are violently overthrown and we are left in the ugly position of having to build up again in the face of new difficulties. We must never forget that the Vatican keep apparently minor errors very much more in their minds than we do. When trying to get a new Irishman into the Vatican, I was reminded of the repeated imprudences of Monsignor O'Flaherty.² Now in my efforts to get our due share of credit for our splendid help in relation to the situation that most worries them I am faced by the horrible fact that two Irishmen clothed with a certain semblance of official authority have, however unwittingly, helped the enemy. We must do something about it. A full statement, in the form of a well publicised lecture by Fr. O'Connor would help a little; though of course it would never get back to Yugoslavia. The other gentleman should be let go back to his legitimate obscurity. He is a seonín,³ spoiled [by] his associations and though knowing the language to a certain extent, he lets statements go without correction implying that we are just an adjunct of Britain, and an exclusively English speaking country. He has no Irish backbone and is the very worst type to send abroad on any mission. His sojourn in England gives him that sense of superiority which is so fatal for our weaker brethren; the sense fully accepted of being more or less English. It is most damnable.