Differences between Home Rule v The Free State

BalcombeSt4

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121061667#Comment_121061667

Yeah, being a Republican and Socialist I pretty much agree with all that. I even support the Provos & INLA campaigns from 1970 - 1982 something that makes me very unliked in this conservative bastion of thread.

But before we blame Unionism & Tories and there is a thousand things to blame them for, we should take a look at our own faults, self-critique is the most important thing in politics and war. "know yourself and known your enemies and 100 battles you will never be in peril" - Sun Tzu

I was surprised to learn that between 1970 - 74/5 the Republican campaign in the north had substantial support in the south. When Sean MacStofain was on his hunger and thirst strike in November 72 a vigil of tens of thousands people were outside his hospital and civil war was being threatened. The IRA in 72 had between 2,000 - 2,500volunteers in fighting units so a nonstop vigil of about 30,000 people is very impressive. But once the Belfast brigade took over after MacStofain was locked up then support in the south began to erode as the conflict took on a more and more sectarian character, like revenge pub shootings and bombings,plus the sectarian tit for tat killings and f-ups like the Birmingham pub bombs and La Mon, that type of activity really turned people against the IRA and in the north it led people to support the middle class SDLP, of course support was strong till the end in ghetto areas like the Bogside & Creggan in Derry and the lower Falls, Markets and Ardoyne in Belfast and even is still strong for armed republicans today.

How would you go about creating a United Ireland? Would you have supported the Provos or the IRA of the 1920's?

Peregrinus

The terminology has changed. You could always bring proceedings for what we now call a judicial separation, but which back then was known as a "divorce a mensa et thoro" — a court decree which said that the spouses no longer had any obligation to cohabit, and which regulated financial, property and custody matters, but which didn't end the marriage and didn't leave either spouse free to marry someone else. This was different from a "divorce a vinculi matrimonii", which completely terminated the marriage, and which you could never get in the courts in Ireland (until 1996).

In the case reported in the Irish Times, if Mr Major had simply left his wife after her adultery, he would have been guilty of the marital offence of desertion and she could have pursued him for alimony. In the fault-based system that prevailed at the time, the orders made in relation to things like finances and property took account of which spouse was "at fault" and which was the "innocent party". So he needed to go to court and establish that she had committed the marital offence of adultery, and get a decree entitling him to live apart from her.

Because divorce a mensa et thoro was the only kind of divorce the Irish courts ever dealt with, these cases were simply referred to as divorce cases.

gaiscioch

Very interesting. So, is The Irish Times essentially misreporting that 1935 'divorce' case in Dublin's High Court and it was, in reality, a judicial separation? The author says 'It appears there were some complicated routes that could facilitate divorce in Ireland in the 1930s.' (https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/books/the-landmark-paternity-suit-that-ruined-an-entire-family-1.4536224)

Or was it legally possible, if you had enough money, to get a real divorce after the divorce ban in 1925 and before the 1937 Constitutional ban?

Peregrinus

No. I think it's a misconception. The "divorce" that Hugh Major sought was a judicial separation on the grounds of his wife's adultery, so as to reduce his maintenance obligations and so as not to be responsible for her debts.

This terminology — "divorce" meaning a fault-based judicial separation — was still in use in the Irish courts until at least the 1980s.

You could not get a real divorce in Ireland between 1925 and 1937, no matter how much money you had. There were limited cases in which you could get a foreign divorce and the Irish courts would recognise that. (Basically, if one or both of the spouses was domiciled in a foreign country, the Irish courts would recognise a divorce granted by the courts of that country.)