I have a substantial reason, I think, for having given notice that I would raise this question on the Adjournment. A very important statement, or at least, a statement which has very important implications, has appeared in the daily papers. I hope the matter of Ulster and the Northern question is of sufficient interest to retain the attention of Deputies in this assembly of the Irish Free State. Announcements have appeared in the Press which, as I said, have important implications. The Dáil is now adjourning for a period, that I had anticipated would be longer, but at any rate it will be of sufficient duration to allow of possibly very mischievous speculations to be indulged in, unless some authoritative statement was made by the responsible head of the Free State Government. It is for that reason, mainly, that I have raised this question to-day. Before I give way to the President to make a statement I should like to make one or two remarks upon this question of North-East Ulster. I am greatly afraid that many people in Ireland, whether in the Free State or in the other section at the moment outside the Free State, have suffered for some time from the illusion that the Free State, and those responsible for it, were going to acquiesce in allowing the Ulster provisions of the Treaty to become a dead letter. If I thought that was possible I would sit in a very different part of the Dáil, if I sat in it at all. It is because I have implicit faith and confidence in the Government to see that Clause 12 is carried out in the letter and in the spirit that I have refrained from raising this matter sooner. Ireland and Britain on the 6th of December, 1921, entered into a solemn International compact. As regards this particular Clause, with which I am dealing, I, myself, had some slight minor responsibility in assenting to it when it was being drafted, and therefore I take more than a superficial interest in it. That compact was entered into on the understanding that everyone of its Clauses would be honoured, that it would not be a question of honouring one and cancelling or ignoring another, but that every one would be carried out in the letter and the spirit that animated the men who brought to an end the conflict between the two countries. I believe that England will carry out her part of the compact with regard to Clause 12. I believe it will be in her interest to carry out Clause 12 of the Treaty, for the Free State has given pledges of its desire to honour the Treaty in every Clause, given pledges in blood and treasure that we cannot yet compute the value or the volume of. We are not going to allow these sacrifices —which we made in men and money, in suffering and in sacrifice—to go for nought.
If England should dare to attempt to violate Clause 12, or escape its implications, then we tell her that there are other Clauses in the Treaty which will go by the board if Clause 12 goes by the board. I think it is time that this sentiment was uttered emphatically and without any equivocation whatever, because there has gone abroad a feeling in England that, after all, we here should not expect that England would take seriously her commitments with regard to Clause 12. We will take her seriously, but the manner in which she has so far adhered to her part of the bargain gives me confidence that it will be rather the sense of honour than the threat of consequences that will keep her to the faith to which she is pledged in this matter. Now, a great delay has taken place with regard to this matter, but I think so far as the Free State is concerned that the time of delay has terminated. The Minister for Home Affairs recently, in a statement reviewing the national position, said in regard to this particular matter, "The case is prepared, the facts are collated, and the relevant statistics are available." That seems to be really equivalent to an announcement of "Seconds out of the ring." So far as we are concerned there is no further reason for delay.
I have seen that the Press has stated that a conference is to be held some date in the future—I hope it will be in the near future—between representatives of the Free State and representatives of the Belfast Parliament. I am glad that our Government has not turned down such a conference. I believe it will be a good thing that representatives of the heads of the Free State Government and of the Northern Parliament should come together and discuss matters which are of common interest to both, because the interests of Ireland as a whole are dear to both, whether they are people from the Free State or people from the North. If we could once break down that damnable barrier which sectarian bigotry and intriguing politicians have made, we would soon put an end to the divisions between the two sections of the country. The more association there is of members of the Free State with those of the North to discuss matters of common interest the sooner will we bring an end to this division that has separated us heretofore. I know, at any rate, that the late President Griffith and the late Michael Collins would certainly have supported the idea of such a conference. After all, even if the Boundary Commission operates, it will not bring that ideal of national unity in the full sense, because it will only deal with certain areas of territory which are in dispute, whether they should come into the Free State or remain under the Northern Parliament. After that is over there will still remain a matter that will require tact, confidence, and understanding between the two sections of the country in order to evolve that ideal unity of territory and civic interest which is the hope and the dream, I think, of every well-disposed citizen in the whole thirty-two counties. This, I do say, that while I commend the idea of this conference, I do not see where it is going to bring us in regard to the real, concrete, practical question which we are up against. Clause 12 must stand. The Boundary Commission must operate, and must operate equitably, or the Treaty has been violated, and who can say what will be the consequences if that transpires? We cannot afford to allow our rights under the Treaty, and established in Clause 12, to be diminished or altered in the slightest degree. We have stood by the Treaty at, as I have said, great cost in blood and treasure and national agony, and the price that has been paid for our honouring the Treaty has been too great to allow it to be violated now with our consent.
I welcome those conferences. I have raised this matter so that the President may put us in possession of some slight indication of what are the facts. The person representing this Government who goes into conference will thereby possibly have an indication of what is the mind of the people behind him in this matter. That will strengthen his attitude there. When he returns I hope he will return not with an accomplished fact to which we have been committed, but with proposals for our consideration, and we will decide upon them in the real interest of Ireland according to our judgment. There must be no prejudicing of Clause 12. There must be nothing done that will give credit to those pessimists who have told the people in the North that we had let them down. There must be nothing now or hereafter that will vindicate those pessimistic falsehoods. We have not let the people in the North down; we have not abandoned them. Clause 12 can be made not only their charter of liberty, but also can be made the instrument by which that artificial division can be broken, and by which ultimately the nation's unity can be restored on even a greater and nobler plane than that on which it existed before it was ever challenged.
