Extracts from a memorandum by Conor Cruise O'Brien
'Visit to Six Counties, July 21-22, 1954'¹

[matter omitted]

IRA Activity. There was general agreement among my informants² on the following points:-

1. The Armagh raid³ had been carried out from the Twenty-Six Counties, but with the assistance of the IRA in the border areas, especially Co. Tyrone.
2. The raid had been greeted with universal approbation and even glee by all nationalists in the Six Counties.
3. That, since the raid, IRA recruiting and ‘marching and drilling’ had gained a certain impetus, especially in Co. Tyrone.
4. That the IRA were not yet a major political factor in the Six Counties: that they were young and inexperienced and had no effective political (as distinct from military) leadership.
5. That the people who applauded their actions did so in a more or less ‘sporting’ spirit, without reflecting on the consequences of the actions, or the logical conclusion of the policy behind them.
6. That the mail-van attack – which has been disclaimed by the IRA – was non-political, and was probably committed by a gang of smugglers to divert police attention.

It appeared also – though there was not unanimity on these points – that bloodshed would be likely to alienate support for the IRA among the ordinary nationalists and would be followed by severe reprisals against the Catholic population. One of my informants (Mr. McAteer) said that there was very general satisfaction among nationalists that the Dublin Government had not condemned the raiders. He indicated that he considered the raid of value in keeping up morale among a population which has been rather cowed and defeatist. He stressed repeatedly that ‘we are not committed to any one line of action – anything that seems to promise even partial results we will support’.

I understand that some at least of the Northern Bishops and clergy suspect Communist influence in the IRA. All my informants – some of whom have IRA contacts – scouted this idea, as far as the IRA in the Six Counties are concerned.

Fianna Uladh (Mr. Liam Kelly’s movement): This movement has little or no influence outside Mr. Kelly’s own area of Co. Tyrone (especially S. Tyrone). The movement is on bad terms with the official IRA and is liable also to internal division. Mr. Kelly’s closest advisers – two local priests – favour his taking his seat in the Senate, but many of his strongest supporters think he should ‘abstain’ from Leinster House as well as from Stormont. I heard tributes to Mr. Kelly’s personal integrity and idealism but none to his ability or capacity for leadership. My informants were agreed that his movement was not likely to be of lasting importance, although his release might be attended by spectacular celebrations, and perhaps incidents and reprisals.

The Abstention policy: My informants agreed that the ‘abstention’ idea which has been a traditional policy among one section of Northern nationalists, has gained some ground especially in Tyrone and Fermanagh. Mr. Liam Kelly’s movement is of course itself abstentionist. Mr. Kelly will probably contest the seat which Mr. Cahir Healy will be vacating at the next Westminster election and an abstentionist will probably run against Mr. Michael O’Neill at the same time. Mr. Kelly is expected to win Mr. Healy’s seat (which of course he will not take) but the contest in Mr. O’Neill’s constituency would very probably let a Unionist in. Mr. O’Neill is reproached (especially by Mr. McAteer) for ‘inactivity’ and neglect of his constituency: it is claimed that, had he shown more activity, the abstention movement would not have revived to such an extent. The abstentionists are themselves divided into two sections: those who regard abstention as an end in itself and those – more important – who regard it as a means of preparing public opinion for the use of violence.

Orange dissension: The divisive tendencies which exist in the Orange Order and in the Unionist Party are probably more important, and in some respects more novel, than the splits among the Nationalists, most of which are not really new. The ‘insurrection’ against Viscount Brookeborough has not diminished and even seems to be gaining some ground. This movement relies on the ‘backwoodsmen’, the bigoted Protestants of the rural areas, especially the County Down, but is being exploited by some men of ability and ambition, notably Mr. W.F. McCoy, KC, who came into the news a few years ago by reason of his advocacy of a Dominion status for Ulster. On the ‘Twelfth’ this year this movement, calling itself the Ulster Loyalist and Democratic Association, distributed thousands of copies of a publication called ‘The Loyalist Voice of Ulster’, which attacks Lord Brookeborough and some of his colleagues for ‘appeasing the disloyal elements’. Among those attacked are Mr. Brian Magennis, Col. Topping⁴ (for attending the Kilkenny debate) and, rather surprisingly, Mr. Harry Midgley.⁵ Those praised are, chiefly, the ex-Prime Minister, J.M. Andrews (‘the greatest living Ulsterman’) and also Mr. Brian Faulkner⁶ and, in a more equivocal way, Mr. George Hanna,⁷ the Minister for Home Affairs. Policies attacked are: the preaching of tolerance by Magennis and others; the banning of Orange processions in certain Catholic areas; the agreement for joint control of the GNR; the increase in grants to Catholic schools from 50% to 65%, and importation of graded cattle and sheep from the Twenty-Six Counties. The alleged appeasement policy is made responsible for the Armagh raid: to prevent such incidents in future (and also to check agricultural competition from the Twenty-Six Counties) the Association urges that the Border should be sealed. It also recommends a tightening up of employment permit regulations as affecting ‘Éire citizens’ and an increase in the ‘B’ specials. ‘The police’, it says, ‘must be supplied with the latest and most effective weapons and should be given a wide discretion in their use.’

In some quarters this agitation is dismissed as a mere ‘lunatic fringe’ affair, but I doubt whether this view is adequate. Some members of the agitation – notably Messrs. Minford and Porter, of the Union of Protestants – would fit fairly well into such a theory, but men like Faulkner and McCoy are serious and calculating politicians, unlikely to support any movement which did not look like succeeding. They are believed to have a considerable following, perhaps a majority, of rank and file members of the Orange Order. The Order as a whole, being much older than either the Government or the Unionist Party, considers itself more important than either, and many of its members feel that the Party has of late not been sufficiently deferential to the Order. Mr. Magennis is of course not a member of the Order.

The Government itself is in a difficult position. Under fire from the dissident Orangemen for ‘tolerance’, they are believed at the same time to be under some pressure from Westminster to display less intolerance. Some recent pointers in this direction are: the concessions to Catholic schools: proposed, but inadequate, concessions to the Mater Hospital; the prompt Stormont reaction to the Department’s housing discrimination film – the Ministry concerned ordered the Omagh Rural District Council to see immediately to the housing of the Catholic families concerned, and this was done. It is generally believed that the Stormont Government took these actions with an eye to British public opinion, and probably as a result of a general ‘policy directive’ from Conservative Party headquarters. This whole issue of ‘tolerance’ for Catholics is the most sensitive issue in the Six Counties to-day. Propaganda directed at this point tends to help on the division of the Unionists; anti-Partition propaganda of a more general kind tends to keep them altogether.

The effect of the Armagh raid has been, on the whole, to strengthen the hands of the extreme Orangemen. The best observers believe that a continuation of such incidents, especially bloodshed, would lead to a ‘closing of the ranks’, perhaps under new leadership, or after the replacement of Mr. Magennis by someone like Mr. Hanna.

As well as the dissension of the rural Orangemen there seems to be some tendency towards defection among the Belfast workers. The ‘showpiece’ of the Twelfth of July in Belfast has long been the elaborate illuminated ‘triumphal arch’ erected at Malvern Street by the shipyard workers, with materials popularly believed to be stolen from the shipyards and aircraft factories. This year for the first time, no arch was erected here, although arches went up in many places throughout the Six Counties. Mr. Scott who has good contacts among the shipyard workers enquired into the reasons for this, and got replies to the effect that the Order was doing nothing for the workers, and they did not see why they should put themselves out for the Order. Unemployment is of course very heavy in the yards at present; it will be remembered however that in the past (notably in 1934 and 1935) similar economic conditions were accompanied by a rise in Orange enthusiasm and by attacks on Catholics. It would be a mistake to build too much on the isolated incident of the ‘arch’ but if it should prove to indicate a trend in the shipyards towards disillusion with Orangeism that will be a matter of the highest political importance. The shipyards have of course hitherto been the mainstay of Orangeism in Belfast.

In general it may be said that the situation in the Six Counties is more fluid than it has been for many years, and that in that fluidity there are great opportunities, as well as great dangers, from our point of view. I shall submit, at an early date, detailed suggestions for exploiting this situation.