The fight for democracy

In spite of its being suppressed by the British government as a 'dangerous association', the first Dáil was the foundation of Ireland's modern democracy

MAURICE MANNING

WHEN THE Irish people voted in the general election of November 1918, they did not vote to elect members to Dáil Éireann. No such institution existed and the election, ostensibly at least, was to elect members to the imperial parliament at Westminster.

Of the 105 Irish members elected, some – mainly Northern unionists – chose to go to that parliament, as did the remnants of the Irish Party. Thirty-four of the newly-elected Sinn Féin TDs were in no position to attend any parliament, finding themselves in a variety of His Majesty’s prisons, while half a dozen others were away on undercover missions.

Nevertheless, within weeks of the election, plans were well advanced to set up a new Irish parliament in Dublin. This new parliament had no legal standing or international recognition, no building of its own, no government apparatus to direct or to carry out its wishes and its calling was, in the words of The Irish Times, “futile and unreal”, a “solemn act of defiance of the British Empire by a body of young men who have not the slightest notion of that Empire’s power and resources, and not a particle of experience on the conduct of public affairs”.

Nonetheless, the Sinn Féin leaders went ahead. A date was fixed, a venue – the Mansion House in Dublin – was secured and invitations were sent to all of the Irish MPs recently elected. On January 21st, 1919 the public inaugural meeting of the first Irish parliament in over a century was held. In spite of the historic nature of the occasion, it was an austere event, the new revolutionaries striving to convey an appearance of respectability and responsibility. Only 27 of the 69 Sinn Féin MPs managed to turn up – 34 were in prison, one had been deported and five were on special missions.

The day began without ceremony – just a short prayer in Irish read by Fr Michael O’Flanagan and then it was down to business. Four temporary clerks were appointed and then, with the speaker in place and clerks at the ready, came the roll-call of names.

The names of each of the 103 MPs were intoned and their presence – or in most cases their absence – was recorded, the phrase “fé ghlas ag gallaibh” (imprisoned by the foreigner) resounding over and over again. There then followed the adoption of a short constitution, after which a series of propagandist statements and speeches were made.

Many observers found it hard to take the event seriously – if it is serious, said the Freeman’s Journal, then “Ireland is on the eve of one of the most tragic chapters in its history”.

The first Dáil lasted from January 1919 to May 1921. In all it met on only 21 occasions over a two-and-a-half-year period. Its attendance was never more than 52 TDs and, at times, it was as low as 20. It was suppressed by the British government as a dangerous association in September 1919 and thereafter it met in secret. These meetings were held in a private house, hotels and in the basement of the Mansion House, always under threat of a police raid.

In November 1919, the Dáil’s then headquarters at 76 Harcourt Street was raided, papers seized and staff arrested. During all of its time it was subordinate to the military campaign, its members never formally consulted, their approval never sought – nor, in fact, did they seek such consultation nor demand such accountability.

Yet in spite of its shadowy existence and non-existent powers, the first Dáil did – however imperfectly – in the words of Brian Farrell, establish the “authentic credentials of modern Irish democracy”. To a great extent it was a clear signal that, once the military campaign was over, the gap would be filled by an elected and sovereign parliament and an assertion of the democratic credentials of the independence movement. But, in addition to its symbolic import and its role in authenticating much of Sinn Féin’s national and international propaganda, the Dáil laid down principles and guidelines as to how the Irish parliament would eventually evolve.

Of necessity, the Dáil constitution was strong on principle, short on detail. But in these broad terms it asserted a central role for the Dáil which had full legislative power, untrammelled by any constraints of a written and rigid constitution, let alone by any claims to judicial review.

It also – and perhaps prophetically – gave a strong position to the cabinet, the Dáil executive power vested in a ministry chosen by the Dáil from its own membership and answerable to it. From the start, the primacy of the prime minister within the system was acknowledged. It was he who selected its ministers, subject to Dáil approval. The existing electoral system of a straight-vote, single-seat constituency was endorsed without debate or dissent.

The procedural rules about such matters as the order of business, parliamentary questions, rules of the day, closure, quorums and the admission of visitors owed much to the House of Commons, and many of these rules have persisted to this day.

Precedence was given to the Irish language. Procedures were put in place to ensure full accountability of public monies. Thus all monies were to be granted by a vote of the Dáil; each ministry was to be answerable for the spending of that money and all accounts were to be audited twice yearly in November and May by external auditors.

All of this reflected British theory and practice, as indeed did the procedures adopted. There is nothing surprising in this. British parliamentary practice was the only model known to most people; the quarrel was with Britain, not with its parliamentary procedures and the circumstances of the time left little room for the luxury of lengthy constitutional debate.

There was, again of necessity, much of the makeshift about this first Dáil. It had none of the pomp or grandeur of Westminster, none of the symbols and trappings of the last Irish parliament of 1782 to 1800.

By June 1919, it had seven full-time officials, two of whom were clerks paid two guineas a day when the House was in session.

TDs, as the new members were called, were paid no salary but could claim up to £20 per month in expenses. In addition, they were allowed a third-class railway fare from their constituencies to attend the Dáil and a lodging allowance of 15 shillings per night when in Dublin.

Ministers were paid a salary. The prime minister – Eamon de Valera since April 1919 and now titled president – was paid £600 per annum while ministers were paid £350, later raised to £500. Directors of government departments were paid £400.

In many ways the fact of the Dáil’s existence was as important as that which it achieved. It had little opportunity for normal parliamentary activity. Its legislative output was almost non-existent. Much of the work consisted of recording reports from ministers and expressing its approval of these reports. It was at its most effective in its propaganda work – especially in hearing delegations and passing various resolutions which could be stamped with the seal of parliamentary legitimacy. Many of the departments set up under the aegis of the Dáil, and in theory accountable to it, had little more than a shadow existence and little of substance to account for.

Local government was the exception, with a majority of local authorities throughout the country transferring their allegiance to Dáil Éireann. In justice, the Republican courts supplanted many of the crown courts; in agriculture an alternative Land Commission was established and, while finance did not in any way supplant the existing system, it succeeded in raising significant national loans.

On the key question of the accountability of the IRA, in theory that army owed its allegiance to the Dáil, but in practice the Dáil had no function or control over it. There was a minister for defence, but the reality was that the IRA was an independent body with its own rationale and momentum. The Dáil was not consulted about the Soloheadbeg ambush which began the War of Independence. It exerted no influence over subsequent fighting, but was expected to take responsibility for the actions of the IRA.

During the two-and-a-half years for which the first Dáil sat, a number of trends emerged. The first, as already noticed, was the reliance on the House of Commons as a model for procedural devices. The second was the quality of the people elected. In much the same way as in the US Revolution, most may have been “politicians by accident” but, before long, leaders of real capacity emerged, many of whom were to remain in positions of leadership for decades to come.

However, perhaps the most significant aspect of the first Dáil was the early dominance of the Executive. Ordinary members soon felt that decisions were taken by the Executive without consultation, that there was no real opposition and that ordinary members were taken for granted. It was to become a familiar refrain in subsequent years and led, on this occasion, to the demand for some form of committee system, a demand led by two future ministers, JJ Walsh and Seán McEntee. Not surprisingly, these demands fell on deaf ears, as they were to do for many years following.

In August 1921 the second Dáil was elected. It was essentially a party assembly of Sinn Féin. Its main work was the Treaty debate which established the Free State. Through the subsequent split the nature of the emerging party system was determined and a tone of bitterness and distrust was bequeathed as a lasting legacy which would disfigure Irish politics for decades. In many ways, the legacy of the first Dáil was more positive – a constitutional parliamentary model that would endure, even at the price of executive dominance.

Maurice Manning had careers in politics and academia. He was a member of the Dáil and Seanad Éireann for 21 years and led the Fine Gael party in the Upper House. He is chairman of the Irish Human Rights Commission.