Letter from Joseph Brennan (for Seán Nunan) to Frederick H. Boland (Dublin) enclosing a memorandum from Joseph Brennan to Seán Nunan¹

I enclose herewith a copy of a report submitted by Mr. Joseph D. Brennan concerning a conversation that he had with a Mr. Wayne Jackson of the State Department.

I should point out that Mr. Brennan tells me that the conversation was completely informal and that there was a certain flippancy in Mr. Jackson's remarks concerning 'incitement to war'.

Nevertheless the subject matter discussed will be of interest to you.

[enclosure]

Minister,
I had a talk yesterday, the 29th, with Mr. Wayne Jackson of the Western European Division of the State Department. Mr. Jackson deals specifically with Irish and British affairs. The conversation covered the following points:-

1. Commercial Agreement. Mr. Jackson said that they in the State Department were very disappointed that the Commercial Treaty had not been signed. He said that they had confidently expected it to be completed before the end of the present year and were surprised indeed that difficulties had arisen. He indicated to me that the State Department had gone all the way they possibly could go to meet our wishes in regard to employment of American capital in Irish industry and said that it was his impression that our Minister (Mr. MacBride) had been quite satisfied with the draft as finally approved by both teams of negotiators but that it was his understanding that when the final draft was put before the Cabinet the Minister for Industry and Commerce objected to one clause, that relating to the employment of capital. So far as I can understand from him the clause, as drafted and agreed to by the Americans, gave the Irish Government power to reject any application for the use of American capital but that the further amendment proposed to the Americans also covered the operation of the capital or the industry once it has been subscribed. This, they felt, would be discrimination against their nationals and they felt that they could not agree to it. He hoped that some compromise on this particular issue might be found.
2. Air Agreement.² Mr. Jackson mentioned the Air Agreement and expressed the hope that it was merely a physical difficulty of consideration which had so far delayed the decision by our Government in regard to the American proposals. He set forth the American point of view and said that if we could not see our way to make some compromise to meet the American suggestions he thought we would be more or less cutting off our nose to spite our face. He hoped that on Mr. MacBride's return from Rome to Dublin he and Mr. Garrett, the American Minister, might reach a measure of agreement on this subject.
3. American Minister's return. Mr. Jackson indicated that Mr. George Garrett, the American Minister, was expected back here on the 9th January for consultation. He will remain about a month. He expressed the hope that Mr. MacBride would be back in Dublin in time for Mr. Garrett to discuss with him the outstanding matters between the two countries and so that Mr. Garrett would be fully informed of our attitude on various subjects before his return here. He mentioned, incidentally, that Mr. Garrett and Mr. MacBride got along very well together and were personally friendly and he expressed his pleasure at this situation.
4. Visit of Sir Basil Brooke. The question of Sir Basil Brooke's visit to this country came up in the conversation.³ I asked Mr. Jackson if Sir Basil would be received by the President. He said no but that he would be received by somebody in the State Department. He could not say who that person would be but I rather gathered it would be the Secretary of State. He mentioned further that he feared the possibility of trouble on Sir Basil Brooke's arrival here and I, of course, deplored the possibility also but he said that they could not very well place any obstacle in Sir Basil's path considering that he had been so co-operative to American troops during their tenure of the Six Counties. He further said that Sir Basil would be received by high military authorities here with whom he had been friendly during the period of the war. I mentioned newspaper reports that Sir Basil was coming out to counteract propaganda relating to Partition and he said he was not at all surprised at that because there was no question about it that our propaganda was very much to the fore.
5. Partition. In this connection he went on to say that we had out here two people from the Six Counties and General Barry⁴ who went round preaching war. I informed him that we had no responsibility for the visit of the persons in question and that they were independent people who could speak their minds. To this he said that General Barry had incited to war in his speeches and the fact that our Consul in Boston⁵ was present on the platform when the speech was delivered which was a direct incitement to war against a friendly power certainly gave the air of being Government approved or sponsored. I asked him if he had seen the full text of General Barry's speech and he said no. I promised to send it to him because, as I explained to him, General Barry set forth the position as it exists today and deplored the possibility of war but said that if war should come then certain measures would have to be taken. He was quite well informed indeed as to the tour made by Messrs. Conlon,⁶ Lennon⁷ and Barry and said once more that our propaganda was proceeding at a fast pace but that the State Department took a poor view of speeches such as Barry's which were in their newspaper context nothing less than, and he repeated it, an incitement to war against a power with which the United States was very friendly.

   I asked Mr. Jackson if there was any hope of the State Department moving to bring about a solution of the Partition problem. I mentioned U.S. intervention in other spheres and their mediation to settle outstanding disputes elsewhere. I quoted Congressman Davenport's⁸ recent speech at Pittsburgh in which he urged that it would be the part of a friend if the United States was to endeavour to reach a solution with Great Britain on the Partition question and pointed out the deep affection in which America was held by the Irish people; that we were prepared to go a long way to satisfy the prejudice of the North: that our Prime Minister had announced that we would be willing to allow the North to retain its local autonomy and all that we asked in fact was that the members now sent to an Imperial Parliament in London should be sent to a United Ireland Parliament and that the services now under British control be transferred to such Parliament. In fact I said it would make no difference to the ordinary person in the North and it would make very little difference to the vested interests there because they would still retain their present posts and to a large extent their present influence. I pointed out the weight which the Northern Ireland party would have in a United Ireland Parliament and said that it would be in the interest of the United States, Great Britain and ourselves to have a solution to the question brought about. Mr. Jackson was very frank in saying that a solution would be most desirable but that in present circumstances the State Department did not feel they should and were not prepared to undertake any interference in that area. I mentioned the possibility of war and their attitude then. He said that was something they would have to leave over until the actual situation arose but that he understood from the strategic people, and this more or less confirms what I heard from Admiral O'Regan,⁹ that they were quite satisfied with the defence situation as it now exists and unless some important change should occur in that situation they were not prepared to take any steps to solve the Partition problem.

6. Embassy question. I mentioned to Mr. Jackson that I had seen a number of reports in the press regarding the possibility of the representation between the United States and ourselves being raised to the rank of Embassy. He said that he had seen those reports and that there had been some discussion in the Department of State but that it was his opinion that it was unlikely that the representation would be raised until these outstanding matters had been got out of the way. He thought the question of timing would arise and he did not consider that the present would be an opportune time to raise the status of the representation. To this I said that my own personal viewpoint was the elevation of representation was a minor matter but that I felt if only the United States could do something about the Partition issue and if we could have an Embassy from a United Ireland then I would be very happy to see the status elevated. In the meantime I agreed with him that it was not a pressing matter but, nevertheless, I gathered from him that the subject was under serious consideration in the State Department.