Irish Civil War: Status of Anti-Treaty Soldiers/Volunteers

Chauncey Gardner

Hi all.

What was the status of Anti-Treaty Soldiers/Volunteers during the Irish Civil War?

ie: were all Anti-Treaty forces registered as state soldiers and with whom? And were other active Anti-Treaty Volunteers unregistered?

Thanks.

Peregrinus

No, the anti-Treaty forces were not registered as state soldiers; they were opposing the state.

Most of them would have been members of the IRA or of Cumann na mBan, though some might not have been formally enrolled or sworn in. And, in the nature of revolutionary movements engaged in a guerilla conflict, record-keeping wasn't always a priority.

But more record were kept than you might think. In the 1920s and 30s, a lot of these records, plus supplementary information about who had served and where, was gathered in the course of determining pension awards for veterans of 1916/the War of Independence/the Civil War. And in the 1940s those records and the results of other research were gathered together and collated by the Bureau of Military History, and all that is now available to historians.

So there is quite a lot of information, but far from complete information, about who served in the anti-treaty forces. But none of it is derived from the records of the National Army of the Free State, because the National Army were the pro-Treaty forces.

pummice

good article here

https://www.rte.ie/history/the-end-of-the-civil-war/2023/0314/1362148-ira-emigration-and-settlement-after-the-revolution/

After the Civil War, many anti-treaty soldiers were harrassed, blacklisted, and couldnt find work in their own country, so hundreds went to America in search of a better life

Chauncey Gardner

Thanks for that Peregrinus and Pummice, much appreciated.

My Grandfather In-Law was Anti-Treaty. Arrested by state forces, interned went on hunger strike and released in December 1923, probably very much persona non grata, his father being Pro-Treaty. Went to England on his release and never came back to Ireland. I met his grand daughter in England. The family history were never spoken about, so I didn't know the circumstances by which he volunteered. It was suggested, but unlikely that he was originally a State Army soldier, but I doubted that.

I was probably under the misconception that at the start of the Civil War the existing State Army itself had split into two factions.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120662318#Comment_120662318

There was no existing Free State Army at the start of the Civil War. The IRA, and the republican movement generally, split over the Treaty. The side that accepted the Treaty became the government of the Free State and set up the National Army, which included many IRA members but also recruited many people who had not been in the IRA. The side that rejected the Treaty fought against the National Army.

Loyalties were divided. People who accepted the treaty might find themselves fighting friends and former comrades-in-arms who had rejected it, and vice versa. Sometimes loyalty to friends and comrades might win out over loyalty to a cause, and there were times when commanders on one side or the other were not confident that particular units under their command were dependable, or would be dependable in particular situations. But other times there was great bitterness between former comrades, and savage things were done. It was a grim time.

It's not impossible that someone might join the National Army but later think better of it and defect to the Republicans, or vice versa, but I don't think it happened a lot. What did happen on quite a large scale was people joining one side or other but rapidly becoming sickened or disillusioned, not necessarily with the side they had chosen but with the realities of civil war. Quite a lot of people simply quietly withdrew from both sides (though it was harder to withdraw from the National Army, since you were enlisted. Plus, leaving the National Army would cost you your pay.)

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058298567/irish-civil-war-status-of-anti-treaty-soldiers-volunteers

In historical fact, the actual State was the 32 county Irish Republic as declared in 1916 - voted for by the people of Ireland as a whole in 1918 - and ratified by the 32 county Dáil Éireann in 1919 - and as strange as this seems, was never disestablished. Whereas the British Empire Dominion Irish Free State did not exist until the 6th of Dec.1922.

The Irish Republican Army were the legitimate army of the 32 county Irish Republic - therefore the so-called "anti-Treaty soldiers" were in reality the legal State soldiers of the 32 county Irish Republic. The Irish Republican Army had every right to defend the 32 county Irish Republic - in fact it was their lawful duty. The IRA took an Oath of Allegiance (as did Dáil Éireann) to the 32 county Irish Republic (see below).

The oath to the 32 county Irish Republic:- “ I, A.B., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I do not and shall not yield a voluntary support to any pretended Government ('Southern Ireland' provisional government), authority or power within Ireland hostile and inimical thereto, and I do further swear (or affirm) that to the best of my knowledge and ability I will support and defend the Irish Republic and the Government of the Irish Republic, which is Dáil Eireann, against all enemies, foreign (British army) and domestic (Free State army), and I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same, and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, so help me, God.”

Whereas - the so-called pro-Treaty soldiers were Crown Forces - set up under the terms of the Treaty as the foreign enemy Kings Local Defence Force in Ireland (see below).

As in all Dominions of the British Empire at that time, their supreme Commander was George V. The Defence Forces were set up as a rival to the legitimate army of the 32 county Irish Republic, namely, Óglaigh na hÉireann/Irish Volunteers/Irish Republican Army.

The pro-Treaty soldiers were also called Provisionals at that time due to being recruited by the 'Southern Ireland' State unelected usurper Provisional House of Commons Government in Jan. 1922.

What is particularly interesting and deceitful about this is how the pro-Treaty side went about and around the army issue in the 32 county Dáil Éireann - in Jan. 1922, Mulcahy outright lied, not once but three times at the same sitting when he said the army was and would remain the army of the 32 county Irish Republic.

By the end of Jan.1922, men who deserted from the Irish Republican Army and defected to renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organisation, country, or set of principles) made their first public appearance.

It is no coincidence that the Defence Forces retain that name - the route of its Imperial origins to this day.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120660473#Comment_120660473

On the contrary - see my post above.

They were in fact registered as State soldiers - the State being the 32 county Irish Republic at that time. They defended the State against the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organisation, country, or set of principles) who on behalf of, and with the help of Ireland's historical and hereditary enemy England, illegally started a war against the 32 county Irish Republic on June 28th 1922.

The historical fact is that the Free State army and its usurper unelected provisional 'Southern Ireland' House of Commons had no authority to attack the Sovereign 32 county Irish Republic on June 28th 1922 - four days after the 'Pact' election votes were counted on June 24th - and suppress the real 32 county Dáil Éireann a mere two days before it was scheduled to meet to discuss the results of the 'Pact' election and dissolve on June 30th, in order to form the new (3rd) 32 county Dáil Éireann on July 1st. at 12 PM.

Peregrinus

The Southern Ireland House of Commons met only once, on 28 June 1921. Only four members turned up — all unionists. The house adjourned after a few minutes and never met again. It never enacted any legislation or debated any motion.

The assembly which debated and adopted the Treaty a year later was not the House of Commons of Southern Ireland; it was Dáil Éireann.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121516612#Comment_121516612

That is historically incorrect. The Southern Ireland House of Commons did meet again in 1922 - and if one was to be pedantic, it still meets in Leinster House to this day.

The (unelected) House of Commons partition Parliament of 'Southern Ireland' also met on the 14th of Jan 1922 to approve the Treaty as stipulated in Article 17 and 18 of the Articles of Agreement for a Treaty - which it did.

17. By way of provisional arrangement for the administration of Southern Ireland during the interval which must elapse between the date hereof and the constitution of a Parliament and Government of the Irish Free State in accordance therewith, steps shall be taken forthwith for summoning a meeting of members of Parliament elected for constituencies in Southern Ireland since the passing of the Government of Ireland Act, 1920, and for constituting a provisional Government, and the British Government shall take the steps necessary to transfer to such provisional Government the powers and machinery requisite for the discharge of its duties, provided that every member of such provisional Government shall have signified in writing his or her acceptance of this instrument. But this arrangement shall not continue in force beyond the expiration of twelve months from the date hereof. https://www.difp.ie/volume-1/1921/anglo-irish-treaty/214/#:~:text=17.%20By%20way,the%20date%20hereof.

"18. This instrument shall be submitted forthwith by His Majesty's Government for the approval of Parliament and by the Irish signatories to a meeting summoned for the purpose of the members elected to sit in the House of Commons of Southern Ireland and if approved shall be ratified by the necessary legislation." https://www.difp.ie/volume-1/1921/anglo-irish-treaty/214/#:~:text=18.%20This%20instrument,the%20necessary%20legislation.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121516612#Comment_121516612

As for what "assembly" debated and adopted the Treaty - it depends what you mean by adopted. The 32 county Dail Eireann debated the Treaty but it did not and could not ratify it - to do so would have been ultra vires.

De Valera put it on record on the 20th of Dec. 1921 as the President of Ireland and of the 32 county Dail Eireann. "I gave notice that when the vote for ratification—I hope that word will not be misunderstood. We have said from the start that there could be no question of ratification of this Treaty. It is altogether ultra vires in the sense of making it a legal instrument. We can pass approval or disapproval" https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/1921-12-20/2/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20I%20gave%20notice%20that%20when%20the%20vote%20for%20ratification%E2%80%94I%20hope%20that%20word%20will%20not%20be%20misunderstood.%20We%20have%20said%20from%20the%20start%20that%20there%20could%20be%20no%20question%20of%20ratification%20of%20this%20Treaty.

PRESIDENT DE VALERA reiterated this again on the 9th of Jan. 1922 - "We are finished with that Treaty as far as we are concerned. It has nothing further to do with this House. We have not passed any Act of Ratification of that Treaty. We have simply passed a resolution of approval which means that the Government of the Republic is not going actively to interfere with those who are to complete that Treaty. When they have completed that Treaty then they will have a definite issue before the Irish people, and not till then, and I challenge them on that" https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/1922-01-09/2/#:~:text=We%20are%20finished,them%20on%20that

Even the rabid Free Stater O'Higgins, said "I first wish to say a few words as to my personal views. I do believe and agree that ratification of the Treaty is technically a breach of the mandate of this Dáil and is technically ultra vires" https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/1921-12-17/1/#:~:text=I%20do%20believe%20and%20agree%20that%20ratification%20of%20the%20Treaty%20is%20technically%20a%20breach%20of%20the%20mandate%20of%20this%20D%C3%A1il%20and%20is%20technically%20ultra%20vires.

To clarify - the unelected Provisional government of Southern Ireland was only allowed to set up as a Dáil Éireann commission to take over various departments from the British and transfer them to the legitimate government of Ireland, namely the government of the 32 county Irish Republic, Dáil Éireann.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121516612#Comment_121516612

Lastly - because you have not disputed my post (7), I take it you accept that the so-called anti-Treaty forces were in historical fact registered as the legitimate State forces - given that the State was the 32 county Irish Republic, and the usurper British Empire Dominion Irish Free State did not exist until the 6th of Dec.1922.

Which clearly makes the renegade Free State army/Provisionals (deserts and betrays an organisation, country, or set of principles), and the usurper unelected provisional 'Southern Ireland' House of Commons, ultra vires under Irish Law.

Which begs the question - what authority did the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organisation, country, or set of principles) and its usurper unelected provisional 'Southern Ireland' House of Commons have to attack the Sovereign 32 county Irish Republic on June 28th 1922 - four days after the 'Pact' election votes were counted on June 24th - and suppress the real 32 county Dáil Éireann a mere two days before it was scheduled to meet to discuss the results of the 'Pact' election and dissolve on June 30th, in order to form the new (3rd) 32 county Dáil Éireann on July 1st. at 12 PM.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121518041#Comment_121518041

While the British government did issue a proclamation of this kind, but it expressly wasn't a meeting of the House of Commons of Southern Ireland; it was a meeting of "members of Parliament elected for constituencies in Southern Ireland since the passing of the Government of Ireland Act, 1920". At the same time Dáil Ministry convened Dáil Éireann for the same time and place. Creative ambiguity isn't a recent invention, you know.

The assembly that gathered made it clear that it was gathering as Dáil Éireann, not as "members of Parliament elected for constituencies in Southern Ireland since the passing of the Government of Ireland Act, 1920". The meeting was presided over by Eoin McNeill, Ceann Comhairle of Dáil Éireann, and not by Gerard FitzGibbon, Speaker of the House of Commons; the Unionist deputies elected for TCD who regarded themselves as members of the House of Commons but not of Dáil Éireann did not attend; the Clerk of Dáil Éireann and his staff suppported the meeting rather than the House of Commons officials; etc. But the UK maintained the fiction that this was just a meeting of members elected to the HoC of SI, as they couldn't be seen to be legitimising what they regarded as an illegal revolutionary assembly.

It's touching that your loyalty to the Crown leads you to accept unquestioningly the British government's somewhat artificial view of the matter, but not many others will agree with you.

Your faith in De Valera's assertion that adopting the treaty would be ultra vires is equally touching, but equally misplaced. You're overlooking, as did Dev, the Constitution adopted by the Dáil at its first meeting in January 1919, which vested "all legislative powers" in Dáil Éireann — no qualifications, limitations or exceptions. The exclusive and unlimited legislative power of Dáil Éireann was also asserted in the Declaration of Independence adopted on the same day. Not only could Dáil Éireann accept or reject the treaty; it was the only body that could accept or reject the treaty on behalf of the nation.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121520823#Comment_121520823

What you wrote above is utter nonsense - a prime example of obfuscation and sophistry.

I would advise anyone who is interested in Ireland's history and who wants to learn, to disregard the post above.

No link to any primary source period documentation provided in your post because none exists - because your post is a mixture of half truths and outright lies.

Peregrinus

I quoted a document to which you had already provided a link, IH. And I quoted the Constitution of Dáil Éireann and the Declaration of Independence. You need links to those? Seriously?

And the Treaty Debates. You want links to the Treaty Debates? Are the primary sources on the history of this period so totally unknown to you?

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121524940#Comment_121524940

You are posting nonsense.

You made no quote from the Declaration of Independence. You quoted from the Constitution of Dáil Éireann but you seem to want to intentionally confuse and conflate the 32 county Dail Eireann with the actions of 26 county Southern Ireland House of Commons and its usurper provisional government.

You quoted article 17 of the articles of agreement for a Treaty which you are stupidly attempting to dispute. What was the name of the Parliament elected for constituencies in Southern Ireland called other than the House of Commons??? In article 18, it explicitly states House of Commons of Southern Ireland.

The meeting on the 14th of Jan 1922 was a meeting of the House of Commons - the second one - you explicitly wrote in post 8 that there was only one meeting in 1921. At the second meeting on the 14th of Jan 1922, 64 pro-Treaty Sinn Féin TDs attended, as did the four Unionist MPs from the University of Dublin - you explicitly wrote in post 12 that they did not attend on the 14th of Jan 1922. The House of Commons elected Liam de Róiste, as speaker and Collins as Prime Minister/Chairman.

And how could I not know about the Treaty debates??? I included links to them from the Dail Eireann website when I corrected you in post 10.

Blackguarding me by posting nonsense that I have a loyalty to the Crown and faith in de Valera is just more obfuscation and sophistry from you.

Irish History

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121524940#Comment_121524940

As for the 1919 32 county Dáil Éireann Constitution which stated "All legislative powers shall be vested in Dáil Éireann". That was obviously for the purpose of upholding the 32 county Irish Republic - not to usurp it, as you are stupidly attempting to suggest. That is why all agreed in Dáil Éireann that they could not ratify the Treaty because as stated on the record of Dáil Éireann, the vote would be ultra vires. Read my post 10 with links again and read below and learn.

The constitutional position from January 1922 till June 1922 when the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organisation, country, or set of principles) illegally attacked the Irish Republic was as follows - the 32 county Irish Republic proclaimed in 1916 and established by the people's vote in 1918, and ratified by the 32 county Dáil Éireann in 1919 could not be disestablished by its legislature, namely Dáil Éireann. The legislature (parliament) and Executive (cabinet) were merely organs of the 32 county Irish Republic, created to maintain and defend the 32 county Irish Republic as the established Sovereign State. In other words, constitutionally Dáil Éireann could not be used to destroy the Irish Republic. The articles of agreement could not be ratified by the 32 county Dail Eireann.

Furthermore, this was clearly understood on January 9th, 1922 when Arthur Griffith took office as President of the Irish Republic and Dail Eireann. He knew that Dail Eireann could not ratify the treaty articles of agreement, and because of this, he pledged himself to maintain the 32 county Republic unless it was disestablished by a vote of the people. Griffith's words:- "Dáil Eireann, as the President said—I must still and always call him President— can only be disestablished by the will of the Irish people. What I propose to do is this—when we adopt the form of Provisional Government—is to arrange for a plebiscite of the Irish people or a General Election on this question as to whether they will have a Free State or a Republic. https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/1922-01-09/3/#:~:text=D%C3%A1il%20Eireann%2C%20as,or%20a%20Republic.

The historical fact is that the people never voted for the treaty, or for war, or to disestablish the 32 county Irish Republic. There was no plebiscite on the treaty because everyone wanted to remove the electorate from the responsibility of voting on the treaty until the voter registry was updated and the Free State constitution was ready for debate - and they wanted to avert war. That is why both Dall Eireann and the Sinn Fein Party agreed the 'Pact'.

The 'Pact', as stated in Clause 1 here https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/debates/debate/dail/1922-05-20/2/ was an agreement between the Sinn Fein political Party to run a National Panel for the 3rd Dail Eireann, the Parliament of 32 county Ireland. Dáil Éireann passed the motion unanimously on the 20th of May 1922. The motion being passed, constituted a decree of the 2nd Dáil Éireann for an election for a 3rd Dáil Éireann, and the 'Pact' under which the election was run, was part of the law of the Irish Republic. A decree is an official order that has the force of law. This is the key point and on which the whole foundation myth lie of the Free State is laid bare.

I dare you or anyone else to produce any period documentation from once the 'Pact' (which the election was legally subject to) was made law, until the election in June, that says the election was about the treaty??? Good luck with that!

Which begs the question again - what authority did the renegade Free State army (deserts and betrays an organisation, country, or set of principles) and its usurper unelected provisional 'Southern Ireland' House of Commons have to attack the Sovereign 32 county Irish Republic on June 28th 1922 - four days after the 'Pact' election votes were counted on June 24th - and suppress the real 32 county Dáil Éireann a mere two days before it was scheduled to meet to discuss the results of the 'Pact' election and dissolve on June 30th, in order to form the new (3rd) 32 county Dáil Éireann on July 1st. at 12 PM???

Manach

Mod Note:

@ Irish History

Like any historical event that resonates to this day, it can get emotive arguing the points. However, as per the forum charter, please retain a civil tone to fellow posters when responding to them.

Hungry Burger

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121515472#Comment_121515472

This post can’t be for real…