Public Service

The Seanad

"All thoughtful persons must admit that Applied Economics should be an instrument of political as well as academic education. Since I am University Lecturer in Applied Economics I appeal with confidence to the Electors of Dublin University as a Candidate for Election to the Senate of Eire.

"If you elect me the Senate will contain a University representative who is professionally competent to examine all public questions in a scientific spirit with special reference to their economic aspects and implications.

"The Senate is being constituted on principles of vocational representation in order that it should contain persons qualified to examine public questions in precisely this spirit. In my present capacity I endeavour to further the welfare of the University and of its Members, with which is intimately bound up the welfare of the country, North and South ; if elected I shall be able to do so more effectively.

"As an Ulsterman who is also a citizen of Eire I regret the barrier that separates North from South. I regret also the unwisdom of adding incompatibility of economic structure to political and fiscal separation thus creating on our side of the Border. vested interests in the maintenance of Partition. It would be more statesmanlike so to order our affairs that our Northern fellow-countrymen might come to regard the idea of reunion with diminishing reluctance.

"An honorable settlement of the 'economic war' and a restoration of' normal commercial relations with Great Britain and Northern Ireland are absolutely necessary if we would arrest the decay of our agriculture which must remain the foundation of our national economy."

He listed the following of his published works as being relevant to political image he wished to project:

Groundwork of Economics (The Talbot Press, Dublin), The Nemesis of Economic Nationalism (PS King & Son, Ltd, and The Talbot Press, Dublin), Articles in The Economist, The Economic Journal, The Nineteenth Century, and in the current (February, 1938) number of The Fortnightly.

He had got the support of a broad-ranging election committee which included Professors Broderick and McConnell (Mathematics), Stanford (classics), Walton and Werner (science), Duncan (economics), Curtis (history), Furlong (philosophy), Rudmose-Brown and Lidell (modern languages), Purser (engineering), Torrens (medicine), the Bishop and the Dean of Clogher (Enniskillen), Dean of St Patricks, and numerous others spanning the spectrum of leading active Irish-residing Protestant Trinity graduates.

He had a panel of honorary secretaries, who handled contact with graduates on the register, all over Ireland, mostly consisting of Church of Ireland clergy, teachers and acedemics outside Dublin (for example WH Porter in UCC, Rev AA Hanbridge in Dundalk Grammar School), with a core-group in Dublin consisting of WA Beers, RBD French and JM Henry; he has also LJD Richardson in Cardiff University whose role would have been to take care of the emigrants in Britain.

This attention to detail paid off, and he was elected. His maiden speech on May 11 1938 is on record in Column 99 of Vol 21 of the Seanad Reports; he commented on the Agreement with the UK (Capital Sum) Bill 1938, second stage, introduced by de Valera as Taoiseach. I reproduce this in full, as he gave his initial assessment of the outcome of the Economic War, and placed the arguments firmly in an all-Ireland context.

In the ensuing debate, Senator James Douglas, with whom JJ subsequently regularly collaborated, wanted to help industry to get into the British market (anticipating the thinking of 2 decades later), and wanted an open declaration of attitude to the Commonwealth. He also wanted an end to tariffs on goods from the North.

In his papers he kept a letter dated 15/12/38 from James Dillon TD, from Ballaghadereen:

Dear Senator / Amidst the tumult of economic imbecility which ordinarily rages in our legislative and administrative assemblies, it is a joy to read a speech vindicating economic sanity, such as yours in the Senate. More power and length to your tongue.

You will often feel that you are a voice crying in the wilderness, it is a mistake, you are the constant drop on the stone of ignorance. / Yours sincerely / James Dillon.

Later in the same week we had the Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Bill 1938 in which JJ called for the removal of the tariff on imported feed, so as to put our producers on the same footing as those in Britain. Consumption of home-grown feed had declined under the tariff regime, as it was no longer economic to winter-feed livestock. Winter feed depended on a mix of home-grown and imported feeding-stuffs.

Then on July 6 1938 there was a motion by Baxter to set up a Commission of Enquiry into the position of agriculture; production was constricted due to lack of credit. Quirke opposed it suggesting that it was the business of the Agricultural panel. JJ came in on this debate at length and Frank McDermot supported him. JJ proposed an amendment to the effect that the issue should be referred to a conference of experts consisting of government, farmers and bankers. Baxter accepted this amendment. In the end the motion was steamrolled by the government majority, shorn of its action guidelines.

Later on July 21 1938 in the debate on 'the Extension of Vocational Organisation' JJ, and indeed Senator Douglas, were critical of how the procedures for election to the Seanad, which were supposed to be on a vocational basis, had been subverted in practice by vocational bodies having only the right to nominated but not the right to elect. In his speech JJ mentioned a Limerick Cottiers Association which had come into existence in response to the right to nominate. This speech encapsulated JJ's philosophy of how he hoped the new Seanad might work.

Then on July 22 in the debate on the Industrial Alcohol (no 2) Bill 1938, introduced by Sean Lemass on July 22, JJ (col 527-530) opposed it, preferring to put effort into expanding the production of pigs and poultry, for which there were export outlets.

November 16 1938 - Fat Cattle Export Subsidy: JJ spoke after Peadar Mac Fhionnlaith, who had spoken in Irish. He began by mentioning an agricultural economists' conference in Montreal which he had recently attended; papers were in English, French and German and there was simultaneous translation. Could this not be done for the Dail?

Getting down to the substance of the debate, he pointed out that the situation had arisen as a result of British policy of subsidising fat cattle, with the result that the price of Irish stores was artificially inflated, and Irish finishers could not compete. While disliking interference with the natural course of trade, it was sometimes necessary, and he argued that the bounty on the export of fat cattle should come, not from the relatively undeveloped other industrial sectors of the economy, but by a levy on the export of young cattle, such as to give the Irish finisher an economic environment comparable to the British one.

He went on to digress into the question of agricultural productivity, which was substantially higher on large farms employing labour, instancing a farm in Louth of 300 acres where 20 men were employed, and various complementary activities were carried out, on scientific farming principles. Such a farm if divided by the Land Commission would provide land for 10 under-capitalised small farms supporting 10 impoverished families. The effect of the 1933 Land Act (which he called the Confiscation Act) was to reduce the price of such a farm, were its owner to wish to retire, to about 25% of its commercial value.

November 23 1938 - Insurance: JJ supported this State enterprise initiative, with the founding of Irish Life by State capital, amalgamating several smaller insurance companies; the Bill was introduced by Lemass.

November 30 1938 - Dairy Produce (Price Stabilisation) Bill 1938: JJ pointed out that under this legislation the Irish taxpayer was supporting the British consumer of Irish butter. Supporting Senator Baxter who had called for the promotion of winter dairying, JJ urged that if they must have subsidies for butter production, why not concentrate it in the winter months, and thereby encourage winter feeding of cattle, and the accompanying requirement for tillage?

November 30 1938 - Agricultural Produce (Eggs): JJ stressed the importance of poultry to the national economy; the numbers had increased steadily since the 1850s, but the size of the average flock had remains small, at about 50 or so. There was a stable ratio between the price of feed and the price of eggs, in the region of 40-50%. If this ratio is forced to rise above 50% poultry numbers tend to go down (this was an oblique reference to one of the economic war effects). He went on to point out defects in the Bill, which specified that only registered wholesalers could export, and urged that large-scale producers should be automatically entitled to be their own own wholesalers. Subsequently in the Committee Stage on Dec 14 JJ reminded the Senate that the poultry population had dropped post 1933, due to the increased price of imported feed.

December 7 1938 - Public Transport (Establishment of Tribunal): this was introduced by Lemass; there were acute financial problems for the railways; JJ welcomed the Tribunal, and urged that it take an all-Ireland view, co-ordinating with the North.

December 14 1938 - Imposition of Duties Bill: in the debate on this Bill JJ was scathing, quoting at length from the Bill to demonstrate the excessive arbitrary power it gave to the Minister, and where it became specific, to demonstrate its unintelligibility. He went on to say that '...so far from private enterprise of the right kind having been stimulated...the only kind of private enterprise that is really encouraged is the enterprise of private businessmen haunting the portals of the Minister's office..'. In other words, he was predicting the emergence of the cosy deal that we saw for decades between the owners of protected industries and the Fianna Fail party.

On the other hand, those industries which had been able to export in the past, such as those involved in the production of linen and woollen goods, had declined. Lemass at this point intervened, to the effect that he was unprepared, but would discuss them on another occasion; he did not think the discussion of export volumes relevant to this Bill. The Cathaoirleach however ruled otherwise, and JJ proceeded to accuse the Minister of sowing industries broadcast rather than 'dibbling them in', and the time had come to thin them, and to concentrate on those which had export potential. He went on to show how the ultra-protectionist approach to the home market had distorted the relation between agricultural and industrial prices and wages.

On the same day on the Oireachtas Allowances to Members Bill 1938 JJ supported McDermot and held out for a decent professional salary.

January 25 1939 - Holidays (Employees) Bill: JJ defended the interests of the agricultural labourer, pointing out that they were not entitled to unemployment benefit, preferring if possible to get a job on the roads, which gave them this entitlement. He urged that legislation should make it easier for farmers to employ labour, and the conditions for agricultural labourers should be improved.

January 29 1939 - Motion on Partition, introduced by MacDermot and seconded by Alton. There was an amendment by O'Donovan calling for withdrawal of British troops and transfer of the reserved powers to the Dail. There was a long and embittered debate; de Valera was there, but initially held his peace. JJ called for the debate to be adjourned.

February 7 1939 - Partition debate resumed; JJ contributed at some length; I have reproduced his speech in full. In it JJ detached himself somewhat from Eire politics and gave an uncompromising outline of the Ulster Protestant mind-set. He estimated that one-third of the Protestant population was liberal and non-sectarian, the tradition from which he had come, the remainder being dominated by hard-core Orange perceptions, regarding this likes of him as being 'rotten Protestants'. All however valued access to British citizenship.

He did not see how they could be educated out of their mind-set by the policies and attitudes of the present Government. He stressed that it was quite wrong to regard them as being in any sense puppets of the British government; they were in fact more Irish than the Irish, and had at the time of the siege of Derry been insurgent supporters of the Williamite 'crowned republic' while the monarchists outside the walls were supporting the absolute rule of James II.

Given the role of the Larne guns in initiating the processes that led to Easter 1916, he urged that they run an annual pilgrimage to Belfast to honour the grave of Carson. He concluded by suggesting that many Protestants had a 'sneaking admiration' for de Valera, and urged the latter in his reply to take on the role of the President of the League of Nations Assembly, and, he hoped, as 'a future President and Viceroy of a reunited Kingdom of Ireland'.

De Valera intervened at length towards the end, and JJ heckled him: on the issue of meeting with Northern representatives 'Try it now'. He also heckled O'Donovan, who promoted the traditional irredentist line, with 'Heil Hitler'.

March 8 1939 - Trade Loans (Guarantee) Bill: this was introduced by Lemass, and JJ spoke next, at some length, critically, pointing out that it went against the recommendations of the Banking Commission ('...this looks like keeping a dog and barking yourself..'), and the Minister would be put under a temptation to give monopolistic State support to some firms rather than others in certain contexts, by implication subject to political or lobbyist pressure. (We here have a foreshadowing of the situation which arose in the context of the Goodman scandal in the mid-90s.) JJ heckled Lemass's reply. '..success in industrial activity will benefit agriculture in the long run..', JJ:'I do not believe it'.

On the same day the Tariff Commission (Repeal) Bill was discussed; JJ again referred at length to the Banking Commission, which called for a research department, and he regarded the Tariffs Commission as a possible vehicle for such a research unit, fit to examine in detail the knock-on effects of any proposed tariff, including its impact on national credit and the stability of the currency. In this context he instanced the tariff policy which led to Australian devaluation. In response to Lemass's subsequent rejoinder JJ corrected him: he was not looking for a 'commission' but for a Research Department, to ensure that Ministers were enlightened.

April 19 1939 - Treason Bill: this was introduced by De Valera and involved the death penalty. Douglas and other opposed it; there were embittered references to Kevin O'Higgins. JJ intervened on May 3 at the committee stage, supporting Douglas, opposing the death penalty on pragmatic grounds.

May 31 1939 - Credit Facilities for Farmers: this was introduced by Prof Counihan, who accepted JJ's amendment, but a pious amendment was proposed by Mac Fhionnlaith and carried by the Fianna Fáil machine.

The essence of the proposal was to make available 'the moiety of the land annuities remitted under the Land Act 1933' as a source of credit to farmers.

JJ's amendment was to convene an expert conference of government, bankers and farmers for this purpose, rather than to impose it on the Commission, which was engaged in work on other aspects of agriculture which was likely to continue for some time. The credit question was urgent and required a solution within the short term. The Counihan solution, based on capitalising the 1933 remission of annuities, JJ supported as excellent; it would enable farmers to invest in the development of their farms, and increase their livestock numbers; the current lack of credit was the main obstacle to this taking place.

July 5 1939 - Agricultural Produce (Cereals) Bill: this was introduced by Dr Ryan, Minister for Agriculture. This was back-tracking relative to a 1933 position; JJ supported it, as representing the funeral of a disastrous policy, that of imposing a tariff on imported Indian meal, allegedly to encourage tillage in Ireland. It had the contrary effect, reducing the overall intake of animal feed, reducing the acreage under oats (which along with Indian meal went into the feed-mix), rendering uneconomic the stall-feeding of cattle, and reducing the production of pigs and poultry; comparative figures for Northern Ireland showed no such decreases.

Later the same day the Imposition of Duties Bill was discussed, and JJ had the opportunity to reiterate his opposition to 'restrictions on commerce' such as to support a mass of small protected industries; industrial output for the home market had increased by £9M but agricultural output had diminished by £20M. He also came out against the idea of requiring licences to import free of duty; the procedure of applying for licences was simply an additional cost on industry. The policy of trying to maximise exports while minimising imports was self-defeating.

July 11 1939 - Appropriation Bill: JJ tried to bring in some arguments about inflation and credit, but was ruled out of order; he should have brought them up under the Finance Bill.

July 12 1939: JJ objected to spending £600K on promoting the tourist trade when the railway hotels were empty, on the assumption that it is for promoting the building of hotels, rather than filling them. He urged the development of guest houses and farm holidays rather than hotels. He objected to tariffs; he had to buy pyjamas in Belfast for 17/6 and was charged 40% duty; would have been %60 if they had been outer garments. '..ridiculous commercial restrictions..'. We see him here in gadfly mode.

July 13 1939 - Land Bill 1938: in a long speech, which is available in full, JJ expressed absolute opposition to this process, which was aimed at dividing up large farms and creating many small ones. His grounds for opposition were both social and economic. He made the case that it was much more productive to manage a large farm intensively with hired labour, adequately rewarded, and adequate capital than could be achieved by individual owner-occupiers of under-capitalised micro-ranches.

In further debate on the Land Bill an issue arose when a large farm was leased to 10 or 12 people, and one would not pay. This was used as an excuse for partitioning commonage. JJ: 'Could the others not put him out?... give them the power to fire him out..'. He referenced the Mount St Club experiment. What JJ had in mind was the Richards Orpen type of co-operative farm model, as discussed in his 1947 SSISI paper.

July 19 1939 - Public Assistance Bill: JJ did not get to say anything on this before the fifth stage, when it had been finalised; he supported it, and used the occasion to float some ideas for reform of the ways in which the State serves the people. He supported the idea of the office of the County Manager, and urged that it become a sort of 'one-stop shop' focus, having access to all relevant citizen information. He supported the provision of social housing, and urged the development of satellite towns connected by upgraded rail links. He urged the devolution of the Civil Service from Dublin.

Finally he homed in on the question of the poverty of the small farmers, who were dependent on road work and such to supplement their incomes, given that their income from agriculture as such was inadequate. On this last point he was defended by the Cathaoirleach from heckling by Senator Quirke, who accused him of being on about the economic war again, and deviating from discussion of the Public Assistance Bill. In fact, he was touching obliquely on the effects of the economic war, and also of the Land Act, which had created an under-class of uneconomic small farmers, who were dependent on social welfare.

Sept 2 1939 - Motion on the Declaration of a National Emergency: JJ supported it, and the policy of neutrality, but adverted to the principle of support for the League of Nations and the need not to be neutral in the face of aggression; he blamed the US for not supporting the League of Nations. League principles had been flouted in China, Abyssinia, Spain and Czechoslovakia. 'The individual cannot be neutral when it is a question of helping the forces of law and order to keep the peace.'

Emergency Powers Bill: the Taoiseach assured the House that the German Ambassador had assured him that neutrality would be respected. JJ, Keane, Douglas and others expressed concern for financial stability in the event of the seizure of sterling assets.

October 4 1939 - Review of commercial and agricultural policies: this was JJ's motion, and it was his contribution to the discussion of the problem of how the Government should handle the emergency. He did it in this form rather than in a debate on the adjournment, because he did not want the Ministers concerned to be put on the defensive; he simply wanted to put forward ideas that the Minister might be interested in taking up.

In a speech which extends over 9 pages of the record, JJ proposed a policy which if adopted would have led to the expansion of Irish agriculture during the war, as it had done during the first world war. A high-level approach to Britain would however have been required, along the lines 'we will expand our agriculture to help feed you, if you will adjust your internal price support system in such a way as help us do so'.

The projected expansion of agriculture was conditional on the British removing the subsidy to their finishers, which meant that the main export from Ireland was the 21-month store animal, which the British finisher could fatten in 3 months and claim the subsidy. It would be necessary to develop a situation where Irish cattle could be stall-fed for export as finished cattle, or increasingly as meat. This would also require the maintenance of imports of maize, and increased tillage for home-produced feed.

The manure generated by the stall-feeding process would maintain the fertility of the land used for the production of wheat for human consumption. Basically JJ was advocating the extension of what was typical productive managed labour-employing large-farm practice throughout the whole of Irish agriculture, and he saw the war as a 'hell-sent opportunity' for doing this. In such a situation it would also be possible to double the pig and poultry population.

Minister Derrig in response to JJ's motion declared his inability to comment; it should be referred to the Department of Agriculture. Senators Douglas, Counihan, Baxter and McDermot were supportive. Senator Quirke expressed the doctrinaire Fianna Fail view, for wheat and land division: '...suitable people on subsistence holdings...independent of the government for their food supplies..'.

The Taoiseach on the Adjournment said that we grew 1/3 of our wheat needs and we should try to increase that by 50%; there would be a guaranteed price for wheat. We should import maize when possible for feed. JJ interjected to the effect that the farmers would go for wheat and drop oats.

Oct 25 - Compulsory Tillage: the Minister for Agriculture Dr Ryan was present on this occasion; he had not been there on October 4 when JJ had introduced his motion. The Minister admitted to having read JJ's speech in the newspaper. JJ used this occasion, opposing the Bill, to re-iterate some of the points of his October 4 speech. He pointed out that if feeding the Irish was the only problem, it could be done with less tillage than we had now. The real problem was to increase overall production in order to supply the needs of Britain. This would happen if we were to do a deal along lines similar to Northern Ireland, as regards agricultural prices.

If there were constraints on imports due to availability of shipping, better to import wheat than animal feed; we could grow the latter easily and reliably. To impose compulsory tillage with an artificially high price for wheat as a cash crop was economic nonsense. Tillage in areas suited to it, mostly for animal feed, would expand in response to an appropriate price regime. Tillage imposed on good grassland would often be a less productive land use.

JJ concluded '...grasslands properly managed in conjunction with livestock farming intensely carried on is a natural concomitant of tillage, although not necessarily on that farm, but it does give economic significance to tillage carried on elsewhere. What we really want to aim at is a natural regional specialisation of tillage in some districts and some farms, and intensified grass cultivation and livestock production in other districts and on other farms...'.

December 6 1939 - Finance Bill: JJ in a 5-page speech castigated government policies since 1932 as having encouraged grabbers to seek a larger share from a diminishing common pool. He illustrated this using the milling industry; it had been the policy of the government to increase the number of small mills, as a means of generating employment. The consequent increase in price of milling had added £425,000 to the cost to the farmers of milled feed, and had resulted in the generation of about 1000 jobs. It would be possible to improve on this by going back to milling with quern-stones, as in the museum, with which maybe 4M people could be employed.

Continuing his analysis with wheat and sugar, in terms of legalised private taxation of one section of the community on another, he ended by making some comparisons with Denmark, New Zealand and Northern Ireland, all of which had done better over the previous decade.

Continuing the next day on the final state of the Finance Bill, JJ reiterated that the alternative to sugar beet production was to till for animal feed crops, so as to be in a position to expand high-value livestock products for export to Britain.

In the ensuing debate Sean T O Ceallaigh stood over Griffith and protection and attacked 'free trade', referencing Oldham and the Barrington Lectures. JJ questioned his right to claim Griffith.

December 13 1939 - Pigs and Bacon Amendment Bill: this imposed a requirement that an exporter of pigs should seek a licence, and a farmer was only allowed to deal with a bacon factory which had a licence. JJ wanted to allow for a situation where a farmer could where appropriate himself become an exporter, as might be necessary if the local factory was at saturated capacity.

Later there was a motion on the Mount Street Club and Agricultural Production introduced by JJ in a speech which extended over 10 pages. The motion was seconded by James Douglas, and the text of the motion was as follows:

"That in view of the importance of increasing agricultural production and alleviating the condition of the unemployed, Seanad Eireann is of the opinion that suitable estates in the possession of the Land Commission, which it is not practicable to divide at present, should be offered to the Mount Street Club, on favourable conditions as regards rent and equipment, for cultivation and management on the same lines as its Clondalkin farm."

JJ went at length into the history and background of the Club, which had emerged as a charitable project but had gone on to develop features of the worker-co-operative, supported by an internal currency system of 'tallies', representing a unit of an hour's work. Trade took place between urban workshops and the farm, and members of the club continued to 'draw the dole', since the work they did in the workshops or on the farm was not paid work such as to disqualify them. The system as described by JJ was in fact something very close to that promoted by contemporary 'guaranteed basic income' promoters, together with the LETS movement.

JJ used the Club as a sort of economic model for the way trade should work between town and country, and as an argument for rural resettlement of skilled urban workers into what would today be recognised as 'eco-villages', clustered around a large-scale managed co-operative farm, with high productivity per worker. The speech amounted to a plea that the Land Commission should focus on this type of policy rather than 30-acre subdivision of estates, and should take local rural landless men on board, along with urban workers, in the common interest.

This speech was greeted with incomprehension bordering on hostility, at the level of allegations that the members were ex-soldiers and would respond to being told what to do, and ill-informed comparison of what was proposed with the type of pre-Famine land sub-division which had led to the 'congested districts'.

The basic ideas developed on this occasion subsequently crystallised into his 1947 'Rural Civilisation' paper to the SSISI, and his 'Irish Agriculture in Transition' model, which he generously attributed to Richards Orpen, though in fact he could have claimed it as his own.

I continue with JJ's Senate speeches in 1940, on the basis that the year 1940 is the last of the 30s decade; I have mostly I think adopted this convention elsewhere. RJ July 2000.

January 4 1940 - Emergency Powers (Amendment) Bill: JJ supported this bill, but used the occasion to vent some of his frustrations with the workings of the system, and with the policy of the Government. He took the 'detached point of view that one might expect from a member of that community of 800,000 foreigners referred to by Senator Goulding..'. He warned against the coercive aspects being used against people engaged in activity motivated by economic hardship, rather than by '..a misinterpretation of our history and our present constitutional circumstance.'

He went on to say that he '...as an independent member of the House, (had) lost no opportunity, especially since the outbreak of the war, in attempting to co-operate with the Government.' He went on as follows, somewhat bitterly: '...I have made suggestion after suggestion, in motions before the House, of concrete methods and policies which in my view the Government could have accepted, consistently with their position, with considerable advantage to the welfare of the State. These suggestions, one after another, have been treated with indifference and contempt. I spent house speaking and listening to others speaking on a motion, the object of which was to try a method of dealing with the problem of unemployment and the Minister in charge of the debate walked out of the House before I had been on my feet two minutes in reply to the speeches made in that motion. That is the extent to which the Government co-operates with me...'.

He went on to say that he was unable to co-operate either with the Government or with the Opposition. He went on however to propose a means whereby a coalition government might be elected, by asking every member of the Oireachtas to rank his or her preferred 10 or 12 members, on a secret ballot, by PR, though he knew that there was '..not the slightest chance of its being carried out..'. Finally he urged re-union of all Ireland by consent as a 'primary objective', 'recognition that the only source of wealth of the nation was organised labour...equipped for production in a spirit of mutual service...', and recognition of the fact that imports to sustain industry have to be paid for with agricultural exports.

After some critical interaction with the Taoiseach's final speech JJ voted for the Bill.

February 2 1940 - Motion on guaranteed price for compulsory tillage: this was introduced by Senator Baxter, and JJ supported it; it was a well-researched speech, conservationist and ecological in its thinking. JJ supported it, with his by now usual remarks on how wheat should fit into the production cycle of managed large-scale livestock farming.

March 5 1940 - Motion on Sterling Policy: this was introduced by McDermot and formally seconded by JJ, who later declared himself satisfied with Government policy regarding sterling parity, as outlined by O Ceallaigh; the main consideration was to recognise the importance of cross-border trade and to facilitate it.

April 10 1940 - Seeds and Fertiliser Supply Bill: this proposed to legalise the supply of seeds and fertilisers by County Councils. JJ supported this, but pointed out that it was not addressing the real problem, which was access to credit by the newly-landed and resource-less small farmers. He urged the formation of mutual credit societies among farmers, such as to enable a collective approach to sources of finance. Failing this, however, the proposed Bill would go some small way to enabling production to be increased.

June 18 1940 - Finance Bill: this speech was made under the influence of a 'sense of impending doom of our civilisation..', France having fallen and the fate of Britain visibly in the balance. He regarded the earlier speakers as '..fiddlers while Rome was burning..' and undertook to speak on the Finance Bill and to link it with the world situation.

There must have been in the air the hint of a wish to get in actively on the side of the Germans, because he attacked this, on the grounds that it would cut off our main agricultural produce market, and our main source of raw material for our industries.

He welcomed the plan to produce peat using unemployed labour on Clonsast bog, but was critical of the State-sponsored regimented approach, urging that existing voluntary efforts (for example the Mount St Club type of organisation) should be encouraged.

On the question of the proposed National Government he was neutral, but suggested that if such were to be favourable to the setting up of Parish Councils, then it might be worth having, as in the event of invasion and the '...large-scale dislocation of national life, there will have to be local organisations consisting of persons in whom the people have confidence. These must be responsible for actions of the most diverse kind, and they must do the best they can without direct orders or co-operation on the part of the Central Government...'.

Finally he brought up the question of the North; he gave anecdotal evidence to the effect that Protestants in Ulster regarded de Valera as being somewhat similar to Hitler. He had defended neutrality by countering '...well down here we are under de Valera's rule. Is there any reason, from your point of view, why we should exert ourselves to escape the rule of Herr Hitler?' He went on to remind the Seanad that '...the people in the North do not realise the fact that down here we have fundamentally a democratic State, and that fundamental and moral values are appreciated just as fully here as they are in the North. It should be our duty to make that realised and to bring it to the consciousness of everybody...'.

He concluded by pointing out that '...from the British point of view, our neutrality is the price they are paying for the luxury of Partition...from the Irish point of view...Partition is the price we are paying for the luxury of neutrality.'

June 26 1040 - Appropriation Bill: JJ again took up the question of the National Government, which had first arisen the previous week. He had been thinking it over, and now came down firmly in favour of the idea, having considered the evils of the continuing role of partisan government in the North under Lord Craigavon. '...We have here a Government which , so far from attempting to take a thirty-two county view of its duty to all Ireland, refuses even to take a twenty-six county view (where)...probably more than 50% of the people (are) not their supporters...the Government has shown itself to be morally and politically on the same level as the Craigavon faction...'.

August 28 1940 - Establishment of Parish Councils: JJ supported this, giving instances from his local knowledge of the Boyne estuary and its mussel harvest. The issue involved pollution by sewage, and concerned the parishes of Mornington, Baltray and Bettystown (at the estuary of the Nanny river nearby). The industry could have been saved with the provision of a purification tank, involving the investment of some £3-4K, to save a local industry worth £8K annually. This would be within the scope of a Parish Council, which '...should be authorised to do everything which is not illegal and which they are prepared to take full responsibility for..'.

November 13 1940 - Extension of Farm Improvement Scheme: the motion was to the effect that the Government be invited to extend, without limitation on valuations, the concessions being made to farmers under £200 valuation. JJ used the occasion to re-iterate his defence of large-scale farming: '...limitation is indefensible and inexplicable unless it is part of a general policy of prejudice against large farming as such.' He went on: '...I have myself recently become a small farmer. I am the owner of 20 acres and to that extent I should be advocating the cause of small farmers and should be going to the Land Commission demanding a share of my neighbour's land. Instead of that, I still find myself prepared to maintain the principle that there is room for large farms as well as small farms, and that the intensively-cultivated, well-managed and adequately capitalised farm of 500 acres is a national asset and one which deserves the encouragement of Government policy....I have in mind a farm of 200 acres on which 20 workers are employed...different grades and qualities of labour...'.

After developing in detail the economic virtues of large-scale intensive farming, he went on to suggest that there might be a perception of religious discrimination in the policy, as the % of Protestant farmers increased as the size of the farm increased, there being 26.7% Protestant farmers on farms over 200 acres, of which there were about 3000. JJ was suggesting that this policy might be interpreted by some (eg in the North) as having a sectarian motivation, though he personally was not making this accusation, as in his '...experience of Government Departments...they have been fair, and more than fair to the Protestant minority..'.

Some navigational notes:

Copyright Dr Roy Johnston 1999