Handwritten letter from Timothy A. Smiddy to Patrick McGilligan (Dublin)

My dear McGilligan:

I read with unusual interest your letter of the 19th August,¹ and I assure you that I appreciate the semi-official notice that you have given me of my proposed change to London, still more so the frank outline you sketched of your plans for the wider sphere of action of the Department of External Affairs.

It is a source of gratification to me to hear of a scheme about to become operative which will have far-reaching consequences for, and that will promote in a very concrete manner, the international status of the Irish Free State. We can play a much bigger part in world affairs than many of our people at home are aware of; and by emphasising our sovereignty a prestige will attach itself to our country which will be of indirect advantage both economically and politically. Already, I am of opinion that our increasing international prestige ought to awaken the consciousness of the six Northern Counties to the fact that we count for something in the community of nations, and that our neighbour Great Britain respects us as a potentially helpful partner. This will be one of those psychological factors that will create an atmosphere for an approach to the settlement of the Ulster question. I am wandering, perhaps, somewhat from the subject of your letter; but I am doing so to emphasize the further impetus that your scheme for expanding the sphere of our foreign relations - when operative - will give to this tendency.

I am pleased by the sympathetic interest you have taken in my suggestion that Macaulay's financial position be improved; and I fully concur in what you have written on the subject. Macaulay, I know, will be grateful to you and content with the result of your efforts, whatever they may be. The fact that his case is being looked into sympathetically, and with every effort to benefit him, will reconcile him to a disappointment, if any, to his expectations. He is on leave of absence at present and will be in Dublin towards the end of this month. I have written telling him I received a letter from you on the subject stating you have his case under most careful consideration and that 'his position and inadequate emoluments have not been forgotten' and that you hope 'to better them substantially very soon'. All other parts of your letter I am treating in the strictest confidence.

I have never met MacWhite but I have followed, as far as available sources of information permit, his activities in Geneva which, in addition to the good reports I have received from people who came into contact with him, make me believe he will fill the post of Minister in Paris efficiently.²

I was glad to read you are choosing men for these posts from the personnel of the Department of External Affairs; and, I am of opinion they will generally be more conducive to promote the permanent interests of the Department and will avoid more easily political entanglements than men not in the service. You are furthering this object still more by making Ministers interchangeable after about four years. This will add to their experience, tact, resourcefulness, and increase the pool of knowledge for the Department. This, apart from other incidental advantages, justifies your idea that a Minister should not remain too long continuously in any one capital.

As I mentioned to you in my card of the 4th instant³ I am cordially agreeable to fill any foreign post in which I might be considered to be of comparatively greater service to the State; and to co-operate heartily with your schemes for the better administration of your Department. However, I have a certain amount of difficulty in assuring myself that I shall be able to make the success of the London post that is desired. I vaguely know its requirements: they are different from the general and miscellaneous character of my work in this country, to which you made such complimentary remarks which I deeply appreciate.

I realize the specific and more measurable character of the duties of High Commissioner. I should not be afraid of the trade aspects of the work - though this is in the hands of an unusually efficient man⁴ - and, perhaps, I should be able to keep you fairly adequately informed of the trend of opinion on Irish Affairs among the British Authorities: but, I admit, what I am somewhat nervous about is the possession of the necessary resourcefulness in devising means and formulae for the handling of discussions on the 'tangles' of the Treaty and the 'crux' of Partition, as also the necessary tenaciousness of purpose, subtlety and persuasive ability in dealing with the British Authorities. In this respect there is a difference between the American and the English: the former are frank and do not so much heed the niceties of diplomacy (though I have had no dealings of this character with them) and are not so suspicious. Hence, with respect to qualities necessary for effective negotiations with British diplomats on the important matters with which a High Commissioner has to deal, I confess, I am not confident of my success; and one is not quite justified in concluding from any success that may have accrued to my efforts in this country to a similar success in London. Frankly, this is my analysis of myself.

On personal grounds a change to London is congenial to me, and so is Paris in the horizon where I spent four years of my student days. At this stage of American feeling towards Ireland - especially of those of Irish descent - I can assure you that you will make no mistake in substituting me by a representative such as Mr J. Walshe or Mr Seán Murphy. The work here is strenuous; if one endeavours to get the best results; and it is decidedly advantageous that a Minister should, as much as possible, be a travelling salesman for the Irish Free State in all the prominent cities of the U.S.A. Only by so doing will people outside the ambit of Washington and New York know anything about us. It also furnishes an opportunity of making social and other contacts which may be useful in time of need.

Already there is a whittling down of bitterness on the part of the supporters of de Valera towards the Irish Free State, and the ground is ready for getting into the minds of those among them who are well meaning some accurate notions of our Constitutional position. Nothing will expedite this object more than the fact that the Irish Free State is making good. But the people here must be told this by every possible means, and repeatedly. Hence, my reason for emphasizing my suggestion that a Minister to Washington should spend a reasonable amount of his time in the various cities of this Country.

As regards the Legation in Washington we have now established all the precedents for situations that are likely to confront a Minister. I have been fortunate in having a congenial and loyal secretary in Macaulay, and I have spared no effort to keep him fully informed of all my activities and methods in dealing with people and events. Hence, a new Minister will have a specific tradition to work and improve on.

You are wise in sending a second secretary to accompany the Minister who, in time, will absorb all Macaulay knows so that there will be a continuity of tradition and so that it will permit Macaulay's filling another post, if desired, without detracting from the efficient and smooth working of the Legation. This was one of my reasons for pressing for a second secretary.

Matthew Murphy will be here for three months in lieu of Macaulay: the experience he will gain will make him a still more valuable official, helping thereby your scheme of interchangeability. I have no doubt but Mr Murphy will perform his duties here with efficiency and tact.

I am of opinion that Mr Seán Murphy possesses the qualities to make a successful Minister at Washington and has all the social requisites.⁵ I shall go to every length to inform him fully of my experience here and to make all the necessary contacts for him.

You mentioned in your letter that 'details as to the finances at Washington and London are being worked out'. Am I correct in interpreting this to mean that the representation allowance in London will be made adequate for the social position of the High Commissioner and for the formation of the necessary contacts? The present allowance that is allowed for that post is negligible and would compel the Commissioner to lead a life of seclusion socially. I need not comment on this as you are in a position, from your experience, to know its requirements; and I am sure you will see that a High Commissioner will be financially enabled to function efficiently as I have no private means to supplement my allowance and emoluments.

Even here, since I became Minister, I have exceeded my allowance and emoluments, although I have economised in my expenditures as I had, in my outlays, always an eye to official advantages.

What you mentioned about Dulanty I shall guard as an absolute secret. I saw somewhat of him while in London during the Treaty negotiations and I was favourably impressed by his ability, so much so that I brought it under the notice of our-much-lamented Michael Collins. He was [words indecipherable] of the time, I believe, with [word indecipherable] as Peter Robinson. I think the Department of Commerce is fortunate in having a man of his attainments and ability in promoting our trade in what is practically our sole foreign market.

Perhaps I have been somewhat discursive but you asked me to write to you fully! I now conclude with every good wish for the success of your scheme.