Is Carson the main reason Ireland was partitioned?

tdv123

We know the British capitulated to the threat of civil war from Carson & Crawford but is this the main reason or would the country be partitioned anyway?

I know he was opposed to any form of independence & was pretty sickened by partition.

owenc

No ulster covenant and agreements thereafter. Nothing to do with him.

Historybluff

tdv123 wrote: »

We know the British capitulated to the threat of civil war from Carson & Crawford but is this the main reason or would the country be partitioned anyway?

A good book on this is Ronan Fanning, Fatal Path: British Government and Irish Revolution, 1910-1922 (London: Faber & Faber, 2013)
Fanning argues that some form of partition was inevitable, given the vehemence of Ulster Unionist opposition to all-island home rule. However, he goes on to argue that the actual form taken by partition was influenced by a number of factors:

• The Conservative Party and the British Army High Command gave wholehearted support to the Ulster Unionists out of sympathy and solidarity for fellow Protestants, suspicion of Catholic 'Rome Rule' and a belief that the Liberal government was wrecking the constitution;
• The prime minister, H.H. Asquith, was frustratingly pusillanimous: when confronted with opposition to home rule, he dithered in the hope that it would go away;
• The First World War led to the long-fingering of the issue due to the war being more important; but not before a bill was passed granting Ireland home rule with the proviso that Ulster Unionists' objections would have to be addressed before it came into operation;
• The postwar government elected in Britain in 1918 was two-thirds Conservative. They insisted on 'no coercion' of the Ulster Unionists. Thus, the Unionists were consulted frequently while the Government of Ireland bill was being drawn up in 1919-20. Indeed, they were given the choice of a six-county or a nine-county Northern Ireland. They chose the six-county option as Protestants outnumbered Catholics in this set-up by a ratio of around 3:1, thus allowing for virtually perpetual Unionist control of the state-let. Sinn Féin, on the other hand, had refused to take its seats in the House of Commons and thus was not consulted.
• The Civil War in the 26 counties/Free State allowed Northern Ireland room to consolidate. Hence, by the time the Boundary Commission was set up to decide on the border between the Free State and Northern Ireland, the likelihood of change was small. This was reinforced by the pro-Unionist bias of the Commission chairman, Justice Feetham.

Riddle101

Eoin McNeil resigned from his position in the Boundary Commission. I always felt that it was a mistake on his part. He should have at least seen it through to the end.

corktina

It's the way he tells it....

Zebra3

I assume the British wanted to retain some sort of foothold on the island in case any free Irish state started getting too friendly for their liking with any of their European rivals.

Manach

Other elements would have been parts of the British establishment who forecast that if Ireland became independent, then the Empire as is would start to decline. AFAIK during the treaty takes, Churchill would have been an example of this. So at a guess, partition represented a face saving exercising to retain an imperial foothold (along with the treaty ports) in Ireland.

claypigeon777

The ethnic, religious and political make up of the majority of the population in the six counties made partition inevitable.
They saw themselves as British, Protestant and Unionist.
The alternative at the time would have been a bloodbath.
It is too simplistic to credit one man with partition.

jonniebgood1

The possibility of partition had first been raised in the late 1800's. It was objected to at that stage by Unionist leaders who felt it reduced their influence to much.

tdv123

claypigeon777 wrote: »

The ethnic, religious and political make up of the majority of the population in the six counties made partition inevitable.
They saw themselves as British, Protestant and Unionist.
The alternative at the time would have been a bloodbath.
It is too simplistic to credit one man with partition.

Well I guess to say he was the main reason is a bit of a stretch. But he was certainly a big reason.

Has anybody read this book on him? http://www.amazon.com/Carson-The-Man-Divided-Ireland/dp/1852854545

Jolly Red Giant

tdv123 wrote: »

We know the British capitulated to the threat of civil war from Carson & Crawford but is this the main reason or would the country be partitioned anyway?

Bald statement there - would you like to back it up with evidence?

I would argue that British Imperialism did not capitulate to anything and consciously imposed partition on the island for political reasons.

ONeill2013

People always say partition was inevitable because the British didn't want there to be uprisings in other countries if the island was given independence but I always assumed the main reason was obviously because of the unionists in the north, if the situation was different and there was no unionists in the north how exactly would partition have been possible, where would they have put the border?

Riddle101

ONeill2013 wrote: »

People always say partition was inevitable because the British didn't want there to be uprisings in other countries if the island was given independence but I always assumed the main reason was obviously because of the unionists in the north, if the situation was different and there was no unionists in the north how exactly would partition have been possible, where would they have put the border?

Well Northern Ireland was valuable from a resource point of view. It had heavy industries up their like Shipbuilding and textile. I suspect the British wanted it for the resources as well.