vention, which had been set up to watch and guide their pro- ceedings; and this decided that the proposal, though perhaps defensible in the case of the southern Unionists, could not be accepted in the case of Ulster. Far more fateful, however, was the failure to reach an agreement on the fiscal powers to be given to the Irish Parliament. The Bishop of Raphoe's scheme contemplated that, pending federation of the United Kingdom, there should be no Irish representation in the Im- perial Parliament; provided for the exercise by the Irish Parlia- ment of complete control over finance, including customs and excise; and suggested the appointment of a commission to negotiate a trade, postal and customs union with Great Britain. These proposals represented a great departure from the principles of the Act of 1914 and an approximation to the Sinn Fein ideal of an independent Ireland. They were opposed by the Union- ists both of the South and North. The former were, indeed, prepared to concede to the Irish Parliament control of excise; but the Ulstermen insisted on full control of finance being left to the Imperial Parliament. Mr. Hugh T. Barrie, chairman of the Ulster representatives, pointed out in a letter to Sir Horace Plunkett l that the difference which had brought matters " nearly to a dead-lock " rested on points of principle and not of detail. He urged that in matters of fiscal policy and economic life the interests of Ireland were inseparable from those of Great Britain, and that there could be no differentiation of taxation or customs barrier between countries which must continue to be so intimately associated. The doctrine of fiscal autonomy was more than " a symbol of political autonomy " as Sir Horace had described it; it would, under a colonial form of government, separate the interests of Ireland from those of Great Britain and thus inevitably lead to the same goal as the Sinn Feiners desired to reach under a republic. 2 The practical independence of Ireland, under the Crown, would mean that, desiring to increase her industrial activities and with prac- tically no raw material within herself, she would be cut adrift from the strongest commercial power in the world and have to rely on her own resources in the welter of economic trouble with which the world would be faced at the end of the war. Ulster- men refused to be divorced from the great industrial people with whom they had so much in common.
On this rock the Convention split. The final report of the sub-committee, presented on Nov. 21, stated that on the all- important fiscal question it had been impossible to find a basis of agreement. The grand committee equally failed; and the question was introduced in the Convention itself, which debated it from Dec. 18 to Jan. 24 without coming nearer to a decision, a compromise suggested by Lord Midleton being rejected by a combination of Nationalists and Ulstermen. The Conven- tion was now in danger of breaking up without effecting any- thing, and on Jan. 21 the Prime Minister addressed a letter to Sir Horace Plunkett inviting a delegation from the Conven- tion to go to London to discuss the crisis with the Cabinet, with a view to arriving at a solution. The invitation was accepted, but the resulting conferences were fruitless, and the problem was once more transferred to Dublin for the Convention to solve as best it might. The Prime Minister still hoped that substantial agreement might be reached; and on Feb. 21 he addressed a letter of appeal to Mr. Barrie, the terms of which left no doubt of his anxiety to effect an immediate settlement and of his readiness to do all in his power to promote it; and on the 25th he sent another letter, in almost identical language, to Sir Horace Plunkett. 3 No appeals and no arguments, however, could effect a compromise when interests and sentiments were
1 Nov. 14 1917. Report of the Proceedings of the Irish Convention (Cd. 9019), p. 68. Sched. vii.
- Cf. with this 18 of the " Report of the undersigned Nationalists "
attached to the Report of the chairman of the Convention, p. 38 : " Federation is not in view. Even if it were, and Ireland were still intent on retaining control of her customs, her sea boundary, and her distinct national character, economic interests would give her a claim in that respect which no member of a federation anywhere else can advance."
3 The letter to Sir H. Plunkett is printed in the Report, p. 20.
in such diametrical opposition. On March 12 the Convention, despairing of reaching agreement, passed a compromise pro- posed by Lord Macdonnell to the effect that customs and excise should be under the control of the Imperial Parliament during the war, and thereafter until the question of such control had been considered and a decision arrived at by the Imperial Parliament, the decision to be taken not later than seven years after the conclusion of peace. The motion was carried, but only by a majority of four in a house of 72 members; the minority included all the Ulster representatives and a number of National- ists. Three days later (March 15) Mr. Barrie moved an amend- ment providing for the exclusion of Ulster from the jurisdiction of the Irish Parliament. This was defeated by 52 to 19, the southern Unionists voting with the Nationalists against it. It marked, however, the definite withdrawal of the Ulster repre- sentatives from any appearance of compromise with the National- ist principle, and the Statement of Conclusions reached by the Convention shows that they voted solidly against all proposals which involved recognition of the principle of setting up an Irish Parliament. 4
The scheme, as ultimately accepted by a majority of the Convention on April 5 1918, provided for the establishment of a Parliament for the whole of Ireland, with an executive responsible to it. The Parliament was to consist of the King, a Senate, and a House of Com- tioa.. mons, but the supreme power and authority of the Imperial Parliament over all persons and causes in Ireland was reserved. The Irish Parliament was to have a general power to make laws for Ireland, subject to certain reservations. Im- perial matters right of peace or war, army and navy, treaties and foreign relations, etc. were specifically excluded from its competence. There were also to be certain restrictions imposed on its power in matters within its competence, mainly directed to safeguarding the liberties of the Protestant minority and the interests of existing Irish officers. To this end also the Convention accepted the principle that 40% of the member- ship of the House of Commons should be guaranteed to the Unionists, the nominated members to disappear in whole or in part after 15 years. Representation at Westminster was to continue, 42 members being elected by panels formed in each of the four provinces by members of the Irish House of Commons in that province, and a fifth composed of members nominated by the House of Commons. All branches of taxa- tion, other than customs and excise, were to be under the control of the Irish Parliament. The question of customs and excise was to be postponed in accordance with the terms of Lord Macdonnell's motion already quoted.
The various sections of the Report had been carried by majorities varying from 51 to 18, to 38 to 34, and the Report itself was adopted by a vote of 44 to 29, several prominent Nationalists, including the Bishop of Raphoe, voting with the Ulster representatives in the minority. It was clear that on no points had that substantial agreement been reached which would alone have justified the Government in attempting a dangerous constitutional experiment in the midst of the war. 6
In Ireland it was all but universally recognized that the Convention, for all the common love of country and mutual good-will between Irishmen of different creeds and parties which it had revealed, had been a failure. It Failure belongs to the history of Ireland, but on the future cbnve/i. development of that history it had, unhappily, no tlon. influence. It was outside the Convention that the fate of Ireland was being shaped. The truth is that the " atmos- phere " provided for the Convention by the release of the Sinn
4 See Report, p. 24, and compare the division list, Appendix xvii.
6 The Ulster Unionist delegates attached to the chairman's Report a protest of their own. They ascribed the failure of the Convention to the refusal of the Nationalist members to agree to a modus vivendi which would both maintain existing fiscal unity, guarantee protection for the Unionist minority, and ensure the safety of Irish industrial enterprises, " the vast proportion of which are situated in the N. E. counties of Ulster, and from which the bulk of the Irish revenue is derived " (p. 3)-
