Letter from Frederick H. Boland to John W. Dulanty (London)
(221/150) (Confidential)

I have your letter of the 11th April¹ concerning your conversation with Christopher Hollis² about the Northern Ireland Bill.

First, to get things straight between ourselves. Immediately we heard of the projected bill we told the British that we would regard as very grievous any extension of the 1920 Act because it would imply, of course, a continuance of the Partition position. At our request, the British showed us the preliminary draft of the main clause of the Bill. We have already sent you a copy of our semi-official acknowledgment saying that we had no comments to make. Just before the bill was introduced, the British sent us the full text. This was acknowledged verbally in similar terms. While, therefore, we raised no specific objection on the particular provisions which were shown to us, it would not be correct, of course, to say that we agreed to them or to the Bill as a whole. From the practical point of view, however, Clauses 1 and 6 which will enable the Six Co. Authorities to co-operate with us in hydro-electric, drainage, transport, etc. schemes, have, in the existing conditions, some positive value from our point of view, particularly as regards the Erne scheme.

Now, as regards Hollis. Probably your best line with him would be as follows.

It is not the case that we have agreed to any clauses of the bill. Any extension of the 1920 Act implies the continuance of Partition and to that extent must be grievous to us. In existing conditions, however, in so far as some of the provisions which will enable the Six Co. Authorities to co-operate with us in schemes for economic development may ultimately tend towards the unity of the country, they are all to the good.

As we understand it, the purpose of the amendment is not to defeat the bill - we gather it is unlikely to be pressed to a division - but to draw attention to the undemocratic manner in which the Belfast Government is using its present powers under the 1920 Act. Any publicity given to this question in the British House where the responsibility for the actions of the Belfast Government really lies, can only do good. There appears to be very little appreciation in England of the flagrant injustice of, for example, the Residence Permits Order and the system of gerrymandering practised by the Unionists ever since they were put into power, and it would not, we feel, be advisable to discourage any move which will help to dispel the ignorance of the British public and also, it is to be hoped, bring home to them the responsibility of their Government for the conditions under which the minority in the Six Counties have to live.