We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Augustine Birrell performed the thankless task of chief secretary for Ireland for a longer period than any of his forty-nine predecessors. His nine years of office from 1907 to 1916 included some of the most critical years of Anglo-Irish history, and ended tragically when he accepted blame for the 1916 Easter rebellion, which has haunted his political reputation ever since. Birrell has been generally condemned by the English and consigned to oblivion by the Irish. This article will reassess Birrell's work as Irish secretary by relating his actual achievements and failures to the complex problems which constituted the Liberal dilemma in Ireland. Emphasis is placed on the earlier and more successful period of Birrell's administration, which has been almost entirely neglected by English historians.
1 Birrell to Lloyd George, 13 Apr. 1914, Lloyd George Papers, Beaverbrook Library, C/3/8/3.
2 McDowell, R. B., The Irish Administration, 1801–1914 (London, 1964), p. 59.Google Scholar
3 Bryce to Goldwyn Smith, 16 June 1906, Bryce Papers, Bodleian Library, MS. Bryce 17, fo. 194.
4 Birrell, , Things Past Redress (London, 1937), p. 194Google Scholar. Birrell ruefully informed Percy Illingworth, ‘I'm afraid the Sister Isle is a Fixture - but until I draw the pay I shall hope for the best’ (Illingworth Papers, 3 Jan. 1907).
5 Birrell to Runciman, 4 Dec. 1907, Runciman Papers, Newcastle University Library, R/1/39. Birrell to Elibank, 3 Feb. 1909, Elibank Papers, National Library of Scotland, MS. 8801, fos. 200–5. For Birrell's comments on the impossible task facing any Irish secretary, see 5 Hansard H.C., XLVI, 2400, 2404 (16 Jan. 1913); ibid. XXXVIII, 443–5 (8 May 1912).
6 ProfessorMorgan, J. H., ‘Home Rule and Federalism’, Nineteenth Century, LXXI (06 1912), 1237.Google Scholar
7 H. W. Massingham, Nation, 6 Apr. 1912.
8 See McDowell, , Irish Administration, pp. 52–77, for the best analysis of the historical evolution of the chief secretary's functions.Google Scholar
9 There are no letters from Birrell for the years 1908–12 amongst the Aberdeen Papers at Haddo House, and the Aberdeens made no reference to Birrell in their memoir, We ‘Twa’. Reminiscences (2 vols., London, 1925)Google Scholar. For Birrell's impatience with the Aberdeens, see, for example, Birrell to Asquith, 16 Oct. 1913 (Asquith Papers, Bodleian, MS. Asquith 38, fos. 235–6).
10 Gooch, G. P., Under Six Reigns (London, 1958), p. 168.Google Scholar
11 Robinson, Sir Henry, Memories: Wise and Otherwise (London, 1923), p. 189.Google Scholar
12 The Times, 21 Nov. 1933. The Times also printed a distasteful obituary by a former class-mate of Birrell's, who maintained that the secret of Birrell's failure in Ireland lay in his refusal to return blows at school, when his sharp wit provoked attack (27 Nov. 1933).
13 Dictionary of National Biography 1937-J940 (Oxford, 1949), p. 82.Google Scholar
14 Dangerfield, , The Strange Death of Liberal England (London, 1936), p. 307Google Scholar. The humour of this description does not excuse its inaccuracy; Birrell was actually a rather large gentleman, and I can find no evidence that he acquired J. M. Synge's ‘Playboy’ nickname. Constantine Fitzgibbon's recent views on Birrell and Liberalism seem to have been influenced by the Dangerfield myth (The Red Hand, London, 1971, p. 288).Google Scholar
15 Stewart, A. T. Q., The Ulster Crisis (London, 1967), pp. 35–6Google Scholar; Robert Blake, ‘The Curragh Incident and U.D.I.’, Listener, 21 March 1974; Jenkins, R., Asquith (London, 1964), pp. 282, 322.Google Scholar
16 Birrell, , Redress, p. viiGoogle Scholar. Birrell's reluctance to revive the bitterness of old political controversies is not a helpful attitude for the historian, but his motive is an unusually modest and worthy one among authors of political autobiographies.
17 See, for example, Stead, W. T., Our New Rulers. The Liberal Ministry of 1906 (London, 1906), pp. 49–50Google Scholar; Nation, 6 Apr. 1912.
18 The Times, 22 Nov. 1933. For Gooch's view, see Under Six Reigns (London, 1958), pp. 116, 120.Google Scholar
19 Manchester Guardian, 21 Nov. 1933.
20 New Statesman and Nation, 25 Nov. 1933; reprinted in Mortimer, Channel Packet (London, 1942), pp. 194–6.Google Scholar
21 Gwynn, Denis, The Life of John Redmond (London, 1932), pp. 141, 156–7Google Scholar. Lyons, F. S. L., John Dillon. A Biography (London, 1968), p. 290.Google Scholar
22 Beasley, Piers, Michael Collins. Soldier and Statesman (Dublin, 1937), p. 43Google Scholar, and Michael Collins and the Making of a New Ireland (2 vols., London, 1926), I, 58–9.Google Scholar
23 O'Hegarty, P. S., A History of Ireland under the Union 1801–1922 (London, 1952), p. 695Google Scholar; see also The Victory of Sinn Fein (Dublin, 1924), p. 29.Google Scholar
24 O'Broin, Leon, The Chief Secretary (London, 1969)Google Scholar. O'Broin's earlier work, Dublin Castle and the 1916 Rising (London, 1966)Google Scholar, gives an excellent account of the rising from the viewpoint of Birrell's under-secretary, Sir Matthew Nathan. It is more analytical, and considerably more critical of Birrell than The Chief Secretary (see, for example, Dublin Castle, p. 16).
25 The Times’ anonymous obituary of 21 Nov. 1933, for example, made no reference to Birrell's important reforms in Ireland from 1907 to 1911, whereas his humiliation in 1916 was considered in detail. Sir John Marriott felt obliged to repair this omission by contributing an appreciation of Birrell's 1908 University Act (ibid. 22 Nov. 1933).
28 For a detailed analysis of the party's divisions over Home Rule, and the stages by which the ‘step by step’ formula was adopted, see McCready, H. W., ‘Home Rule and the Liberal Party, 1899–1906’, Irish Historical Studies, XIII (1963), 316–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hepburn, A. C., ‘Liberal Policies and Nationalist Politics in Ireland 1905–10’ (2 vols., unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Kent, 1968), I, 1–59Google Scholar; Marley, Margaret, ‘Asquith, Home Rule and the Gladstonian Tradition 1882–1908’ (unpublished doctoral thesis, Queens’ College Belfast, 1972), passim.Google Scholar
27 See Lyons, , Dillon, p. 285Google Scholar; Gwynn, , Redmond, p. 138.Google Scholar
28 Mortimer, , Channel Packet, p. 194Google Scholar; Mrs Green to Bryce, 17 Oct. 1907, Bodleian, uncatalogued Bryce Papers. Gooch, Six Reigns, p. 120. Birrell's reputation as ‘the enthroned wit of the Party’ (Stead, , New Rulers, p. 49Google Scholar) occasionally drove him to protest against unfair accusations of flippancy (e.g. 4 Hansard, CXCIII, 1801, 30 07 1908Google Scholar).
29 There are numerous testimonies to Birrell's parliamentary talents and his effectiveness as a public speaker. See, for example, Alfred Emmott's diary, 1, fo. 4, 5 Mar. 1907, Nuffield College Oxford; Masterman, Lucy, C. F. G. Masterman (London, 1939), p. 85Google Scholar; Charles Trevelyan to his wife, 16 Jan. 1913, Trevelyan Papers, Newcastle University Library; 4 Hansard, CXCIII, 1790 (Balfour, 30 July 1908). John Burns even found Birrell's speech on Irish land purchase ‘intensely amusing and interesting’ (Burns’ Diary, 16 July 1913, British Library, Add. MS. 46335, fo. 127).
30 Birrell's affection for Asquith is revealed in his character sketch in Redress (pp. 246–54), which includes the revealing comment that ‘I was never able to find any fault with Asquith as a human being except that he was always very much the same’. Asquith's feelings for Birrell were indicated when he listed his cabinet in ranking order of ability for Venetia Stanley's entertainment in 1914; he omitted only himself and ‘our dear Birrell, who is in a class by himself (Jenkins, , Asquith, p. 340Google Scholar; see also p. 329, note 2).
31 Robinson, , Memories, p. 192.Google Scholar
32 Gwynn, , Redmond, p. 157.Google Scholar
33 The Times, 28 June 1913. A few months earlier, an Irish critic of the Nationalist party publicly expressed his regret that Birrell should be the special idol of the Irish representatives in the Commons (ibid. 20 Feb. 1913).
34 C. P. Scott diary, 30 June 1914, British Library, Add. MS. 50901, fos. 142–3.
35 Robinson quickly discovered that there was little chance of changing Birrell's views, for ‘his own ideas and intentions were too firmly held to be shaken a hair's breadth’ (Memories, p. 193).
36 5 Hansard H.C. LXXXII, 36–7 (3 05 1916Google Scholar). See also Birrell's speech at the Oxford Union, The Times, 4 March 1911: ‘He did admit great sympathy with Ireland, and he still recognized the mystic, haunting, all-pervading sentiment of nationality… He loved Ireland and had learned to believe that she had before her a happy and proud destiny…’; Birrell, , Collected Essays (3 vols., London, 1899), III, 111Google Scholar; 4 Hansard, CLXXXIH, 594 (Birrell, 3 Feb. 1908)Google Scholar; 5 Hansard H.C. XLVI, 2400–6Google Scholar (Birrell, 16 Jan. 1913).
37 A. C. Hepburn provides the most comprehensive accounts of the crisis over the Council bill in ‘Liberal Policies’, I, 180–329, and ‘The Irish Council Bill and the Fall of Sir Antony MacDonnell, 1906–7’, Irish Historical Studies, XVII, 68 (09. 1971), 470–98Google Scholar. For a brief analysis, see Lyons, , Dillon, pp. 289–98.Google Scholar
38 W. R. Davies to Bryce, 25 Oct. 1907, uncatalogued Bryce Papers. See also Emmott diary I, fos. 40–2, 31 Aug. 1907.
39 Birrell to Campbell-Bannerman, 30 Oct. 1907, Campbell-Bannerman Papers, British Library, Add. MS. 41240, fo. 130.
40 Birrell, , Redress, pp. 194, 200–5Google Scholar. The historical background to Birrell's measure is best described by Moody, T. W., ‘The Irish University Question of the Nineteenth Century’, History, XLIII (1958), 90–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41 4 Hansard, CLXXXVIII, 840Google Scholar (Dillon, 11 May 1908). Nation, 6 Apr. 1912. See also Sir John Marriott's obituary, The Times, 22 Nov. 1933.
42 For contemporary accounts of the reasons for the collapse of the 1903 legislation see, for example: 4 Hansard, CLXXXIII, 575–96Google Scholar (Birrell, 3 Feb. 1908); 5 Hansard H.C. III, 188–94Google Scholar (Birrell, 30 Mar. 1909); 5 Hansard H.C. VIII, 1492–1500 (Dillon, 30 July 1909).Google Scholar
43 4 Hansard, CXCIII, 1804Google Scholar (Birrell, 30 July 1908). See also 5 Hansard H.C. I, 606–27Google Scholar (Birrell, 23 Feb. 1909).
44 For Unionist attacks on Birrell, and demands for coercion, see, for example, 4 Hansard, CLXXV, 434–43, 452–6Google Scholar (Lord Londonderry and Earl of Mayo, 4–5 June 1907); 4 Hansard, CXCIIIGoogle Scholar, 1786–90 (Balfour, 30 July 1908); 4 Hansard, CLXXXIII, 547–67Google Scholar (Long, 3 Feb. 1908). Birrell's critics made great play with his unfortunate remark, soon after arriving in Ireland, that Ireland had never been so peaceful for 400 years (e.g. Carson, ‘Mr. Birrell's Record in Ireland’, Quarterly Review, CCVIII (1908), 285Google Scholar. According to Lord Fitzmaurice, Birrell failed to understand that the disorderly people in Ireland expected the government to repress disorder, as part of a recognized political game (uncatalogued Bryce Papers, 26 July 1907).
45 Robinson, , Memories, p. 198.Google Scholar
46 Birrell to Runciman, 4 and 15 Dec. 1907, Runciman Papers, R 1/39.
47 Quoted in O'Broin, Chief Secretary, p. 25, but the source does not appear to be cited. However, the statement is supported by Asquith's remark to Crewe, 23 Sept. 1908, that ‘Birrell can hardly be moved just now’ (Crewe Papers, C/40, Cambridge University Library).
48 Fitzmaurice to Bryce, 10 Feb. 1909, uncatalogued Bryce Papers. Bryce replied that even in 1906, no member of the cabinet seemed to follow Irish affairs or take any interest in them (23 Feb. 1909, ibid.).
49 Birrell to Elibank, 3 Feb. 1909, Elibank Papers, MS. 8801, fos. 200–5.
50 5 Hansard H.C. XXIX, 1998 (16 08. 1911)Google Scholar. See also, ibid. XXXVIII, 436 (8 May 1912); The Times, 17 Oct. 1912. For an account of the bill's transformation in the Lords, and the final compromise, see Annual Register 1909, passim, and Lyons, , Dillon, pp. 307–8.Google Scholar
51 Robinson, , Memories, pp. 188, 195–6Google Scholar. Casual observers were sometimes deceived. Arthur Ponsonby reported in 1911 that ‘old Birrell’ was very popular, but was suspected of not taking much trouble (Herbert Gladstone Papers, British Library, Add. MS. 46023, fos. 211–13, 10 Jan. 1911). Against this should be weighed Robinson's more informed verdict (especially Memories, pp. 192–3).
52 The references to Birrell's speeches in Hansard's index for 1911 (5 Hansard H.C. XXXIII) cover 21 pages, compared with 9 for Asquith and 16 for Lloyd George. Birrell attended the House more often than most cabinet ministers, even though he had to spend several months in Ireland each year. During the spring session of 1912, Birrell attended 137 divisions out of a total of 212, compared with only 77 for the prime minister, 76 for Grey, and a mere 50 for Churchill (Constitutional Year Book, 1913, pp. 325–37Google Scholar).
53 Birrell to Redmond, 1 Dec. 1909, Redmond Papers, National Library of Ireland, Add. MS. 15169 (Bodleian, MS. Film 1059).
54 Birrell was fully alive to the fact that, whilst the Parliament Act cleared the way for Home Rule, it created new problems of its own. He told C. P. Scott what a ‘“prickly hedge” was set up by the 
Bill with its 2 years delay & necessity for triple passage of a Bill substantially unaltered (so that there 
be no give & take between Lords & Commons or concessions as it might be wise & necessary to make’ (C. P. Scott diary, 2 Feb. 1911, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 1–2).
55 The Times, 4 March 1911.
56 Churchill to Birrell, 29 Aug. 1911, Verney Papers. I am indebted to Sir Harry Verney, Birrell's parliamentary private secretary 1911–14, for allowing me to see this correspondence, and for a memorable conversation about his former chief.
57 Government of Ireland Bill, drafts dated 21 June and 1 Aug. 1911, Lloyd George Papers, C/19/2/1–2.
58 Samuel to Gladstone, 15 Sept. 1911, Herbert Gladstone Papers, B.L. Add. MS. 45992, fos. 295–6. The Times, 2 Feb. 1912.
59 F. S. Oliver to Bonar Law, 20 Aug. 1912, Bonar Law Papers, Beaverbrook Library, 27/1/47.
60 Memorandum on Clauses of the Home Rule Bill, 29 Jan. 1912, 6 pp. TS. marked ‘confidential’, MS. Asquith 106, fos. 6–8; copy in P.R.O. Cab. 37/109/8.
61 Ibid. These included Lloyd George's ‘grand committee’ clauses (see below), the explicit Westminster veto on Irish legislation, and the enumeration of the powers to be granted to the Irish parliament, rather than those expressly excluded.
62 Birrell, , Redress, p. 212.Google Scholar
63 The term’ devolution’ was rarely used by Liberals, due to its association with the ill-fated Unionist scheme of 1904–5. ‘Federalism’, though less accurate in reference to the United Kingdom, was particularly favoured because it allowed for the possibility of imperial federation.
64 C. P. Scott diary, 20 July 1911, Scott Papers, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 21–2. It is perhaps significant that Morley was the only other Irish expert in Asquith's cabinet and he was equally opposed to Home Rule all round (Gooch, G. P., Historical Surveys and Portraits (London, 1966), p. 202)Google Scholar.
65 Chamberlain's vague references to federalism in the 1886 Home Rule debates (3 Hansard CCCIV, 1204–6; ibid. CCCVI, 697) are usually cited as evidence of his belief in Home Rule all round. But privately and anonymously he emphasized the impracticability of such a scheme: ‘A Radical View of the Irish Crisis’ (anon.), Fortnightly Review, N.S. XXXIX (02. 1886), 277Google Scholar; Chamberlain to Morley, 28 Dec. 1885, quoted by Fraser, P., Joseph Chamberlain: Radicalism and Empire (London, 1966), p. 84Google Scholar. Few men were prepared to admit their ulterior motives quite so openly as Dawson of The Times: ‘His idea was to make play with Federal idea (while riot believing in it) to get the anti-federal features of H.R. Bill eliminated…’ (C. P. Scott diary, 13 Apr. 1914, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 110–11).
66 Lansdowne to Balfour, 24 Oct. 1910, Balfour Papers, B.L. Add. MS. 49730, fos. 129–31.
67 See Kendle, J. E., ‘The Round Table Movement and Home Rule all Round’, Historical Journal, XI, 2 (1968), 332–53;CrossRefGoogle ScholarGollin, A. M., The Observer and J. L. Garvin, 1908–14 (London, 1960), pp. 168–234.Google Scholar
68 See, for example, Asquith's speech at St Andrews, The Times, 8 Dec. 1910; Asquith to Rosebery, c. 1892, Rosebery Papers, Nat. Lib. Scot., MS. 10001, fos. 31–2; Haldane to Grey, 26 Dec. 1910, Grey Papers, P.R.O., F.0.800/102/133–6; Grey to Asquith, 26 Oct. 1910, MS. Asquith 12, fo. 198.
69 For Lloyd George's views on federalism in the 1890s, see, for example, Lloyd George at Carnarvon, 12 Feb. 1889, Lloyd George Papers, A/6/3/2; and at Treharris, 23 Nov. 1895, ibid. A/8/1/50. For his references to federalism in 1910, see his draft memorandum on coalition, 17 Aug. 1910, Lloyd George Papers, C/3/14/8, and c. Oct. 1910, Elibank Papers, MS. 8802, fos. 123–7.
70 See Churchill, Randolph S., Winston S. Churchill. Young Statesman 1901–14 (Boston, 1967), p. 427Google Scholar; Churchill at Carnarvon, 18 Oct. 1904, Carnarvon Herald, 21 Oct. 1904.
71 For Loreburn's rather complicated views on federalism, see C. P. Scott diary, 6–8 Sept. 1911, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 37–40; Samuel gave mild support to the federalist principle in his first Reading speech, 15 Apr. 1912, 5 Hansard H.C., XXXVII, 57–80.Google Scholar
72 For Churchill's two cabinet memoranda on devolution, dated 24 Feb. and 1 Mar. 1911, see MS. Asquith 105, fos. 5–7; P.R.O. Cab. 37/105/16, 18. Ilbert's critique was printed for cabinet use, 9 March 1911, Birrell Papers, Bodleian, dep. c. 301, fos. 5–6; see also Ilbert to Bryce, 26 Apr. 1911, and 24 Oct. 1912, MS. Bryce 14, fo. 23 and MS. 40, fos. 63–6.
73 C. P. Scott diary, 22 July 1911, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 23–30.
74 Pencilled note by Lloyd George, 27 Feb. 1911, Lloyd George Papers, C/12/2; C. P. Scott diary, 22 July 1911, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 23–30.
75 Jack Pease's diary, II, fo. 28, 16 Aug. 1911, Gainford Papers, Nuffield College Oxford. The Gainford Papers were consulted by kind permission of Dr Cameron Hazlehurst and Mrs C. Woodland, who are currently editing the Pease diary.
76 Birrell to Churchill, 26 Aug. 1911, Verney Papers.
77 Churchill to Birrell, 29 Aug. 1911, ibid.
78 John Burns’ diary, 7 Dec. 1911, B.L. Add. MS. 46333, fo. 208; McKenna's objections to Lloyd George's plan were stated shortly afterwards in Home Rule Bill, 11 Dec. 1911, Lloyd George Papers, C/19/3/1 (also P.R.O. Cab. 37/108/176).
79 Memorandum on Clauses of the Home Rule Bill, 29 Jan. 1912, p. 4, MS. Asquith 106, fos. 6–8. Birrell to Dillon, 2 Apr. 1912, Redmond Papers, N.L.I. Add. MS. 15182 (Bodleian, MS. Film 1063).
80 Nation, 6 Apr. 1912.
81 Mark Lockwood to Bonar Law, 22 Aug. 1912, Bonar Law Papers, 27/1/50. Riddell, Lord, More Pages from my Diary (London, 1934), p. 188.Google Scholar
82 Burns’ diary, 16 Oct. 1912, B.L. Add. MS. 46334, fo. 192. The Times, 22 Mar. 1913.
83 Quoted by Jenkins, Asquith, p. 322.
84 Addison, C., Four and a Half Years (2 vols., London, 1934), I, 29.Google Scholar
85 For information on Larkin and the Irish urban labour movement, see Larkin, Emmet, James Larkin: Irish Labour Leader, 1876–1947 (Cambridge, Mass., 1965).Google Scholar
86 See, for example, Charles Trevelyan to Walter Runciman, 3 Nov. 1913, Runciman Papers, R/1/17:'…the immediate thing I thoroughly dislike is the mismanagement of the Dublin Strike. The prosecution of Larkin from the political point of view is the height of folly. It is the kind of thing to make our relations with the Labour party impossible. The moderate labour men are just as mad as the extremists at the (to them) patent differentiation between Larkin and Carson…Larkin's methods may be intolerable. But most progressives think his main objects right and Carson's wrong. Vet he is imprisoned and Carson romps about free…You had better let Larkin out as soon as you can.’ For similar comments, see C. Addison to Lloyd George, 10 Nov. 1913, and Lloyd George's reply, 11 Nov. 1913, Lloyd George Papers, C/10/2/24; Addison believed Larkin had done a good service in drawing attention to the deplorable housing and wage conditions in Dublin.
87 Pease diary, II, fo. 79, 11 Nov. 1913.
88 Birrell to Asquith, 20 and 26 Sept. 1913, MS. Asquith 38, fos. 196–7; Birrell's speech at Bristol, The Times, 15 Nov. 1913.
89 Pease diary, 11, fo. 79, 11 Nov. 1913; Asquith's cabinet letter to king, 12 Nov. 1913, MS. Asquith 7, fo. 69. See also C. Addison to Lloyd George, 10 Nov. 1913, Lloyd George Papers, C/10/2/24; G. M. Trevelyan to W. Runciman, n.d.: ‘the trial reads like a trial of 1819’ (Runciman Papers).
90 Ibid. No doubt Birrell's depression over the Larkin affair contributed to his decision to submit his resignation on 13 Nov. 1913 (MS. Asquith 39, fos. 20–1), but his dilemma over Ulster and his wife's illness were more significant reasons.
91 See Lord Oxford and Asquith, Fifty Years of Parliament (2 vols., London, 1926), II, 140–2Google Scholar; Spender, J. A. and Asquith, C., Life of Lord Oxford and Asquith (2 vols., London, 1932), II, 21–2Google Scholar; Gwynn, , Redmond, pp. 224–5.Google Scholar
92 Pease diary, II, fos. 77–8, 14 Oct. 1913; Harold Spender to Lloyd George, 22 Sept. 1913, Lloyd George Papers, C/9/5/38.
93 Birrell to Asquith, 3 Oct. 1913, MS. Asquith 38, fos. 220–1.
94 Birrell to Asquith, 26 and 27 Apr. 1914, MS. Asquith 41, fos. 25–31 and 71–2. Birrell's advice contrasted sharply with that of his lord lieutenant, who was firmly convinced that all the gun-runners should be arrested (Aberdeen to Birrell, 26 Apr. 1914, MS. Asquith 41, fos. 18–24; Aberdeen to Asquith, 25 Apr. 1914, ibid. fo. 12). The Nationalists and the Irish police, however, were even more strongly opposed to prosecution than the chief secretary: see Redmond to Asquith, 27 Apr. 1914, MS. Asquith 41, fos. 51–3; conversation with Dillon, C. P. Scott diary, 26 Apr. 1914, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 112–13. An R.I.C. report from Belfast on 28 April 1914 appeared to justify this attitude: ‘Any attempt to arrest leaders or to seize the arms of the Ulster Volunteers would without doubt lead to bloodshed and precipitate what would practically amount to war all over Ulster.’ (MS. Asquith 41, fo. 58; see also ibid. fo. 78, for subsequent police report confirming this.)
95 See Asquith's cabinet letter to king, 27 April 1914, MS. Asquith 7, fos. 115–16, for the government's initial determination to take instant action to vindicate the law; the decision to reverse this was taken in London and communicated to Birrell in Dublin (MS. Asquith 41, fos. 79 and 82–3).
96 C. P. Scott diary, 27 July 1914, B.L. Add. MS. 50901, fos. 144–7. Addison, Four and a Half Years, I, 29.Google Scholar
97 For Birrell's views on the Irish police see Birrell to Asquith, 30 Aug., 28 Oct. 1913, and 26 Apr. 1914, MS. Asquith 38, fos. 122–5, 243–4 and MS. 41, fos. 25–31.
98 Hythe to W. O'Brien, 18 July 1916, mfm. of N.L.I. MS. 8557, kindly lent by Dr Philip Bull. For a convincing defence of Birrell's non-coercive policy up to 1916, see Nation, 6 May 1916; Beasley, , Collins (1926), I, 58–9Google Scholar; Birrell to Maida Mirrielees, 23 May 1916, Birrell Papers, B.L. Add. MS. 49372, fo. 164; Birrell to H. Jackson, 23 Nov. 1916, ibid. 49382, fo. 23; O'Hegarty, Sinn Fein, p. 29.
99 Aberdeen Papers, 1/42 (12 Mar. 1912). MS. Asquith 39, fos. 20–1 (13 Nov. 1913). Garnett, David, Flowers of the Forest (London, 1955), p. 11Google Scholar. Redmond Papers N.L.I. Add. MS. 15, 169 (Bodleian, MS. Film 1059), 3 Nov. 1914. Birrell to Redmond, 25 May 1915, quoted by Gwynn, Redmond, p. 426.
100 Lloyd George's rather low view of the chief secretary's status is revealed in Riddell, More Pages, p. 188. It is significant that after the Easter rising Asquith considered appointing Lloyd George as secretary of state for Ireland, replacing both chief secretary and viceroy (P.R.O. Cab. 37/148, 21 May 1916).
101 Churchill to Asquith, 5 Feb. 1910, Churchill, R. S., Young Statesman, p. 351Google Scholar; Blunt, W. S., My Diaries (2 vols., London, 1920), II, 300Google Scholar. Birrell was relieved at Churchill's refusal, especially as he had ‘none too much faith in W.C. Thinks he'll make too much splash’ (Birrell to Asquith, 1 Feb. 1910, MS. Asquith 36, fo. 4; Munro-Ferguson to wife, 4 Nov. 1911, Novar Papers, MS. 40) Birrell's fears were partly to be justified by Churchill's melodramatic Belfast visit in Feb. 1912, and by his inflammatory speeches at Dundee in Sept. 1912, and at Bradford just before the Curragh crisis.
10 2 Ilbert to Bryce, 5 Sept. 1912, MS. Bryce 14, fos. 56–8.
103 For Birrell's views, see e.g. Blunt, , My Diaries, II, 350Google Scholar; The Times, 25 Mar. 1911; Birrell to Churchill, 26 Aug. 1911, Verney Papers. For Nationalist views, see, for example, Kettle, T. M., Home Rule Finance (Dublin, 1911)Google Scholar; and for the Primrose Report, see Report of the Committee on Irish Finance, Cd. 6153, 17 Oct. 1911, P.R.O. Cab. 37/108/132.
104 Samuel's scheme was developed in a long series of cabinet memoranda, in Nov.-Dec. 1911 (Samuel Papers A/41/2–4; P.R.O. Cab. 37/108/141, 145–6, 153–5, 167). For Birrell's criticisms of Samuel's plan, see Birrell's cabinet memorandum, 27 Nov. 1911 (Lloyd George Papers, C/20/1/4; P.R.O. Cab. 37/108/161).
105 See Redmond and Dillon's Memorandum of 29 Jan. 1912, pp. 4–6, for Nationalist objections to Samuel's scheme. For Liberal back bench hostility to the customs’ provisions, see, for example, The Times, 8, 20 Nov. 1912; 5 Hansard H.C. XLIV, 147–9; Redmond to Birrell, 20 Nov. 1912, Redmond Papers, N.L.I. Add. MS. 15, 169 (Bodleian, MS. Film 1059).
106 Spender and Asquith, Life of Asquith (2 vols., London, 1932), II, 14Google Scholar. A similar view is expressed in Jenkins, Asquith, p. 274, and Rowland, P., The Last Liberal Governments. Unfinished Business 1911–14 (London, 1971), pp. 41–2.Google Scholar
107 Birrell to Churchill, 26 Aug. 1911, Verney Papers.
108 For the conflicting opinions of Birrell's official advisers, compare Sir James Dougherty's view (Birrell Papers, Bodley, dep. c. 300, fos. 31–2), with Sir David Harrell's opinion (MS. Asquith 39, fos. 87–92).
109 Birrell, , Redress, p. 212.Google Scholar
110 Birrell to Churchill, 26 Aug. 1911, Verney Papers.
111 Churchill, W.S., The World Crisis (6 vols., London, 1923), I, 181Google Scholar. I can find no reference to any Liberal suggestion of Ulster exclusion before 1912, other than Birrell's own letter to Churchill.
112 Cabinet letter to king, 7 Feb. 1912, MS. Asquith 6, fos. 95–6.
113 Nicolson, H., King George V (London, 1967), p. 296Google Scholar; Birrell to Asquith, 30 Aug. and 8 Sept. 1913, MS. Asquith 38, fos. 122–4, 128–9. If Birrell ever suggested Ulster exclusion in cabinet, there is no evidence in the fragmentary material on cabinet meetings currently available.
114 Birrell to Asquith, 13 Nov. 1913, MS. Asquith 39, fos. 20–1.
115 See Tennyson, Sir Charles, Stars and Markets (London, 1957), p. 121Google Scholar; The Times, 2, 3 Sept. 1913; transcript of my interview with Mrs Lucy Masterman, 3 Feb. 1974; letters from Birrell to Sir Charles and Lady Tennyson, 1913–15, Birrell Papers, Liverpool University Library, MSS. 8. 2. (1–2).
116 Birrell, , Redress, p. 193Google Scholar; Birrell to Redmond, Dec. 1915, quoted by Gwynn, , Redmond, p. 463.Google Scholar
117 Quoted by Gwynn, , Redmond, p. 427.Google Scholar
118 Churchill to Asquith, 5 Feb. 1910, Churchill, Young Statesman, p. 351; Gwynn, , Redmond, p. 425.Google Scholar
