Full download A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 3: Consociation and Confederation Brendan O'Leary file pdf all chapter on 2024

A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume
3: Consociation and Confederation

Brendan O'Leary
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/a-treatise-on-northern-ireland-volume-3-consociation-
and-confederation-brendan-oleary/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...
A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 1: Colonialism

Brendan O'Leary
https://ebookmass.com/product/a-treatise-on-northern-ireland-
volume-1-colonialism-brendan-oleary/
A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 2: Control

Brendan O'Leary
https://ebookmass.com/product/a-treatise-on-northern-ireland-
volume-2-control-brendan-oleary/
Lucky Clover: A Paddy's Day Novella: RBMC Book 2.5

(Royal Bastards MC: Belfast, Northern Ireland 3) Dani
René
https://ebookmass.com/product/lucky-clover-a-paddys-day-novella-
rbmc-book-2-5-royal-bastards-mc-belfast-northern-ireland-3-dani-
rene/
Policing and Combating Terrorism in Northern Ireland

1st ed. Edition Neil Southern
https://ebookmass.com/product/policing-and-combating-terrorism-
in-northern-ireland-1st-ed-edition-neil-southern/
Treatise on Awakening Mah■y■na Faith John Jorgensen
https://ebookmass.com/product/treatise-on-awakening-mahayana-
faith-john-jorgensen/
Harmony from Discords: A Life of Sir John Denham

Brendan O Hehir
https://ebookmass.com/product/harmony-from-discords-a-life-of-
sir-john-denham-brendan-o-hehir/
The Catholic Church and the Northern Ireland Troubles,

1968-1998 Margaret M. Scull
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-catholic-church-and-the-
northern-ireland-troubles-1968-1998-margaret-m-scull/
Deniable Contact: Back-Channel Negotiation in Northern

Ireland Niall Ó Dochartaigh
https://ebookmass.com/product/deniable-contact-back-channel-
negotiation-in-northern-ireland-niall-o-dochartaigh/
The European Union and the Northern Ireland Peace

Process 1st ed. Edition Giada Lagana
https://ebookmass.com/product/the-european-union-and-the-
northern-ireland-peace-process-1st-ed-edition-giada-lagana/
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 22/3/2019, SPi
A TREATISE ON NORTHERN IRELAND

A Treatise on Northern
Ireland
Volume 3: Consociation and Confederation
From Antagonism to Accommodation?
B R E N D A N O ’ LEARY
1
3
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Brendan O’Leary 2019
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2019
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018966455
ISBN 978–0–19–883058–0
Printed and bound in Great Britain by
Clays Ltd, Elcograf S.p.A.
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
To Anna, Hana and Leila, my daughters, who know how to

negotiate, and who confirm that this skill is not confined
to those who would claim to be purely Irish.
Preface
The passage of ten months since the typescript of this treatise was sent to the
publishers has obliged no revisions of its concluding arguments. Peace continues
in Northern Ireland according to any international or political science definition.
Though there are still shootings, bombings, paramilitary assaults, and arrests of
loyalists and republicans, all such indicators are in dramatically lower registers
than before the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. The Police Service of Northern
Ireland released its annual statistics in October 2018 covering the period until
September 2018. Two people died in 2017–18 in killings attributed “to the security
situation,” the customary administrative euphemism; the number is just below the
annual average death rate since 2008–9 of 2.5 persons per annum. Peace therefore
continues, though it is not guaranteed.
Slow demographic change continues to extrude into local political geography,
shaping school openings and closures, residential housing markets and disputes
over access to public housing, and controversies over electoral districting. In these
extrusions may be traced the faded hegemony of Ulster unionists. Official ratifi-
cation that Ulster Protestants, however defined, have ceased to be a majority in
Northern Ireland awaits the 2021 census, though for now the region has three
political minorities, nationalists, unionists, and others. It seems less probable than
it once was that this configuration of inter-group sizes will stabilize into a new
equilibrium. Instead it seems increasingly probable that a reversal of status looms:
Ulster unionists will soon be less numerous than Northern nationalists, and,
strikingly, the recent policy positions of unionist parties may accelerate that
trend, because of the impact they will have on cultural Catholics who have so
far identified as “others.”
Since 2017 the DUP has overtly supported a minority Conservative government
in London, intent on exit from the EU. Theresa May’s cabinet’s negotiations with
the EU 27, thus far, have had spectacularly humiliating consequences. They have
resembled charges of very light brigades against the entrenched cannons of the
EU, and some have started to reason why. The Conservative–DUP parliamentary
alliance has magnified the disarray among the UK’s negotiators. The DUP’s
posture has not reflected the popular will in Northern Ireland, where a majority
voted to remain in the EU in 2016, a majority increasingly reinforced in size as
knowledge of the possible consequences of UKEXIT spreads. Ulster unionist
parties and their voters divided over the key question. Most backed leaving the
EU, but a very high proportion have had second thoughts about its repercussions,
a shift that has not been reflected in the postures of the current DUP leadership. If
there must be a UKEXIT, most unionists have signaled that they prefer a soft one;
that is, they want the entirety of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to stay within
the European customs union and the single market, and thereby avoid the
creation of fresh border infrastructure, either along the UK border in Ireland or
in the Irish Sea. This judgment is supported by a social scientific survey of the
Northern Ireland public and a deliberative forum co-organized by the author.
Principal investigator John Garry, Kevin McNicholl, James Pow, and I reported
the results in spring 2018, and presented them to British, Irish, and EU officials.
viii Preface
The results are consistent with the arguments elaborated in the concluding
chapter of this volume. Two were headlined in the press. Those preferring North-
ern Ireland to remain within the EU had risen to nearly 70 percent, compared to
the 56 percent who voted that way in the June 2016 referendum. And, a hard exit
from the EU, defined as leaving the European customs union and the single
market, would almost double the probability that Northern Catholics will favor
Irish reunification. The data and analysis, sponsored by the UK’s Economic and
Social Research Council, were published in Northern Ireland and the UK’s Exit
from the EU: What Do People Think? Evidence from Two Investigations: A Survey
and a Deliberative Forum (Belfast: Queens University Belfast & The UK in a
Changing Europe, 2018). A parallel judgment flows from a YouGov online poll,
conducted for the BBC, and reported in June 2018. It showed Irish (58.6 percent),
Northern Irish (57.9 percent), and European (56.7 percent) identifiers outnum-
bering British identifiers (46.7 percent) in Northern Ireland, with over a quarter of
respondents affirming that the UK’s decision to leave has made them more likely to
vote for a united Ireland. Less than 50 percent identified as British, a result
unimaginable in 1968, and not the most probable of projections in 1998.
Northern nationalists, notably Sinn Féin and its supporters, may become the
key players in deciding whether the Northern Ireland Assembly is restored, and,
in due course, whether and when there will be a referendum on Irish reunification.
The later such a referendum is held, in the author’s view, the greater the prob-
ability that there will be a decisive vote for Irish reunification. Sinn Féin’s
enthusiasts will seek an early referendum, but they would be unwise to do so.
Waiting for the Referendum will, however, become the new canopy under which
Northern Ireland politics unfolds. A second Scottish independence referendum,
and a second referendum on the UK’s EU membership, may yet precede one on
Irish reunification. In the interim, the fate of the institutions of the Good Friday
Agreement will remain undecided. That the assembly will not be restored before
the UK’s scheduled exit from the EU in March 2019 looks certain. Key DUP
leaders re-advertise that they never supported the Good Friday Agreement—
though they accepted the St Andrews Agreement that amended it within the
rules of amendment of the Good Friday Agreement. So far Peter Robinson’s plain
post-retirement warnings to his party have been studiously ignored.
Confidence in the robustness of the Good Friday Agreement has therefore
fallen; it had already been dented by the evidence presented in the latter part of
this volume. This judgment is obliged by current evidence, even though, quite
remarkably, the entirety of the EU, as well as the governments of the UK and
Ireland, are now pledged to the preservation of the Good Friday Agreement “in all
its parts.” This pledge, however, is impossible to maintain, if understood literally.
If and when the UK leaves the EU, there will have to be modifications to the Good
Friday Agreement and its UK and Irish legislative enactments, as is explained in
Chapter 3.7. It is true that the British–Irish Intergovernmental Conference
(B–IIGC) has been revived, at Irish insistence, and, as foretold and prescribed in
this volume. But it has met just once, in July 2018, with overt reluctance and poor
grace displayed by UK Prime Minister May. The meeting was without major
output. Further pressure from Ireland to make the B–IIGC a more meaningful
policy forum can be expected if the assembly and executive are not restored.
We can also expect pushback from Conservatives on that front, especially as long
Preface ix
as they need DUP votes. Conversely, we can expect any future Labour government
in London to co-champion the revival of the B–IIGC.
That the passage of ten months has not obliged an author to revise or modify
arguments developed and refined over thirty-five years should be much less
surprising than the fact that no significant updating has been required by the
events of 2018. It is as if in this interval Northern Ireland has been hit by an ice
storm. When such a storm emerges, roads may become impassable, especially if
strong winds accompany the freezing rain. When the freezing rain accumulates on
surfaces and the ground, it creates a glaze of ice, and when a quarter inch or more
of such ice accumulates on tree branches, power lines, and power poles, they may
be unable to withstand the new burden that they are forced to carry. The entire
landscape freezes, while wise humans stay indoors. They await the sun, or the
eventual melt from higher temperatures, not yet knowing the scale of damage with
which they will have to cope. What they can see from safety, however, is entirely
familiar, and in sharper relief. But only a full thaw will reveal the cost of the storm,
possibly triggering sharp and abrupt changes, and collapses in familiar landmarks.
Northern Ireland was not prepared for the political ice storm that hit in the
summer of 2016. By early 2018, however, an effort to restore the assembly and the
executive emerged, only to fail as it surfaced. Specifically, the DUP got cold feet on
making concessions to Sinn Féin related to the Irish language. Arlene Foster
evidently had been seeking to return to the first minister’s position, but the
DUP withdrew from the heavily annotated textual agreement because its terms
did not survive reception by its Westminster parliamentary leadership, let alone
its grassroots. Foster looked isolated. The DUP’s Westminster MPs, led by Nigel
Dodds, were happier in a supply-and-confidence arrangement with the Conser-
vatives than in sanctioning re-entry into coalition government with Sinn Féin.
Political life in “the wee six” therefore remained suspenseful and stalemated. The
political chill was intermittently broken by prophesies of disaster while the parties
awaited the collateral damage from the UK’s projected secession from the
European Union. The Alliance, the Greens, the SDLP, and Sinn Féin remained
ardent Remainers and looked confident about European futures, while exasper-
ated at their inability to be met or taken seriously by the London government. By
contrast, the DUP’s pledge never to forsake the blue skies of Ulster for the grey
mists of an Irish Republic sounded like a battle cry from long ago, as well as being
poorly informed by meteorological science. The DUP now professed to see blue
skies ahead from UKEXIT, while it looked simultaneously petrified of another
prospective British betrayal. Legislation is being prepared at Westminster, as
I write, that will enable civil servants in Northern Ireland to make some quotidian
decisions in the absence of the Northern executive. This rule by local bureaucrats
will be based on a careful legislative effort to avoid breaking the UK’s treaty
obligations with Ireland, and to avoid violating the Good Friday Agreement—a
formal legislated suspension of the assembly and executive would certainly be
that, and cannot be contemplated as the UK seeks to leave the EU.
For over two years the repercussions of UKEXIT, real and imagined, have filled
the airwaves across the Isles, Europe, and the world. Meanwhile, within the
narrower confines of the North, the slow but steady public inquiry into the
Renewable Heating Initiative, widely known as “the cash for ash” scandal, has
cast an unflattering searchlight on Foster and other key DUP figures, both
x Preface
ministers and their special advisors. The scandal has been described by the
Guardian’s Ireland correspondent, Rory Carroll, as just like the “Game of
Thrones: the big budget TV drama filmed in Northern Ireland with a sprawling
plot involving power, pillage, and fire. There is a vacant throne, a beleaguered
female leader surrounded by backstabbers, a kingdom with a deep treasure chest
across the sea and the risk that everything will be reduced to ash.”¹ Efforts by the
DUP to shift the blame to civil servants for the imbroglio have not been persua-
sive, though the civil service has not emerged unscathed from the probe. Key
officials admit, for example, not to have taken minutes of key meetings, allegedly
at the behest of DUP and Sinn Féin ministers. The inquiry’s report is yet to be
delivered, but the public evidence-taking has closed. Those who have watched and
listened to the proceedings will be very surprised if the report’s authors do not
expose at least some members of the DUP as poor and corrupt governors of the
public purse. Whether Sinn Féin will emerge fully vindicated remains to be seen.
Pro-unionist media will probably focus on the fact that the inquiry’s chair has
already portrayed rival departments, headed by DUP and Sinn Féin ministers, as
opportunistic alley cats, engaged in fighting their opposite numbers rather than
prioritizing good government. But it seems probable that a strong whiff of petty
kleptocracy among the DUP’s ranks is scheduled for judicial and judicious
indictment. As the inquiry proceeded, the DUP’s difficulties were magnified
when Ian Paisley Jr was exposed in yet another expenses scandal, which led on
this occasion to his suspension from the House of Commons. He narrowly
avoided, under newly established procedures, becoming the first Westminster
MP to be recalled by his constituency and obliged to restand in a special election.
He was spared that embarrassment solely because of an indefensible administra-
tive decision that made it far more difficult for many of his constituents to sign the
relevant petition than it need have been.
Petty corruption within the ranks of one of its two premier parties of govern-
ment is unfortunately a regrettably normal phenomenon in contemporary
democracies. It does not explain why Northern Ireland has been restored to global
media attention. Its constitutional and political status has become globally visible
again because it is now the key obstacle to the ambitions of those who ardently
want the UK to leave the EU. To the so-called Brexiteers, the Good Friday
Agreement either does not, or should not, constrain the UK’s departure from
the EU. Some of them affect outrage at the idea that one part of the UK may end
up being treated differently from another, even though the Good Friday Agree-
ment is the standing example of differential constitutional treatment of one
component of the UK. With brutal frankness, some polling has demonstrated
that a large portion of the English and Conservative public who favor the UK’s
departure from the EU simply do not care if that process is at the expense of the
Good Friday Agreement. Others, however, think very differently. The govern-
ments of the EU 27, and those in Great Britain who favor remaining in the EU, are
firmly agreed that Northern Ireland is the subject of an international treaty, which
the UK government should be obliged to uphold—even if it is determined to leave
the EU. In this judgment, May’s feet, and that of her cabinet colleagues, must be
¹ Guardian, September 28, 2018.

Preface xi
held to the fire: Britannia may not waive the rules to which it has signed up, nor
should it be allowed to resile from the negotiating concessions that it made in
December 2017.
Before that last moment is briefly elaborated, one minor update is required. The
past tense is now required to describe Boris Johnson as the UK Foreign Secretary.
Having resigned in protest against Prime Minister Theresa May’s compromise
proposals for leaving the EU—the so-called Chequers Plan was unveiled in July
2018—Johnson has struggled to avoid consignment to what Trotsky once called
the dust heap of history. That Johnson’s ambition exceeds his abilities, or his
willingness to do his homework, is not world-historical news, nor a partisan
judgment. Indeed, these traits may prove no impediments to his ultimate ascent
to his party’s leadership and the UK premiership. What matters, for our purposes,
is what he exhibits, both in his impatience and in his expressions of impatience.
For now, the “Irish backstop” is the target of his wrath, the object through which
he presses his claim to become the best guardian of the UK’s exit. The backstop is
the proposal, to which May’s government, with Johnson in her cabinet, agreed in
December 2017, in solemn undertakings with the EU’s negotiators, in order to
allow the withdrawal negotiations to proceed to the next stage. As explained in the
concluding chapter of this volume, the backstop, if given credible legal framing,
would prevent, forever, the erection of fresh physical infrastructure on the border
created by the partition of 1920. Short of a technological miracle, it would apply in
all circumstances—even if Great Britain were fully to leave the EU’s customs
union and the single market. Johnson is not alone in complaining that the
backstop prevents the UK from exiting the EU on his preferred terms, though
his terms are invariably vague, romantic, and articulated in the future perfect
tense. He persistently gestures toward technological solutions to customs inspec-
tions, collection regimes, and regulatory monitors that are not yet known to public
officials or journalists, but he is scarcely singular in this respect.
Critics cannot decide whether Johnson advocates “Canada Dry” or “Canada ++,”
shorthand expressions for different ways of taking the UK out of the European
single market and customs union, as well as all of its other institutions. With no
formal withdrawal agreement on the terms of its secession from the EU, the UK
would head toward “Canada Dry”—namely, a hard and cliff-edge exit, as the saying
goes. By contrast, with a formal withdrawal agreement and a promised future
“special relationship” with the single market, the UK may accomplish “Canada
++”—namely, a hard exit with a transition period before a trade agreement is
completed with the EU. As I write, efforts are being made by May to lengthen
and soften that transition, and to avoid the backstop being made permanent. The
latter will be stoutly resisted by Ireland, especially by its Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar,
and its Tánaiste, Simon Coveney, and, Ireland assumes, by the EU 26.
Nearly one hundred years ago, as surveyed in Volume 2 of this treatise, Canada
was an ambiguous role model for the future Irish Free State in the negotiations
concluded under the auspices of Prime Minister David Lloyd George for Great
Britain, and of the Vice-President of Sinn Féin, Arthur Griffith. Today Canada is a
much more ambiguous role model. It is seen as a beacon for those would-be
British policymakers who disbelieve that it is usually more efficient to trade with
one’s immediate neighbors than with those who live and produce further afield.
The first British dominion, partly built by English and Scots settlers, has recently
xii Preface
completed a trade agreement with the EU, known as CETA, the Comprehensive
Economic and Trade Agreement—it was signed in October 2016. Its parties are
the EU, its member states, and Canada. Over two decades in the making, the
CETA was concluded after seven years of negotiations. This negotiating history,
especially its length, is cheerfully ignored by advocates of following “the Canada
option” for UKEXIT. They point out that the UK conforms for now to EU laws
and regulations, and therefore, they reason, making a UKCETA should be much
easier and faster than the making of the CETA. But the self-styled Bexiteers
frequently though conveniently fail to observe that the reason they prefer the
Canada option is precisely because they want to diverge from EU laws and
regulations. This openly expressed ambition alone makes a fast UKCETA much
less probable. The EU has diplomatically pointed to the CETA as one logical model
for future relations between the EU 27 and the UK, especially if the EU is expected
to take the London government at its word—namely, that it wants to be able to
make its own free trade agreements with other countries. But, no EU official whom
I have met or interviewed in 2017–18 expects or promises that a UKCETA will be
quickly or easily negotiated. Given the time spent in negotiating the so-far uncon-
cluded withdrawal agreement, experience suggests that it is EU officials who are
making the sounder judgment about the speed of future negotiations.
In 1921 the Welshman Lloyd George and his English Liberal and Conservative
partners insisted that Ireland had to remain within the British Empire. If it
seceded from the UK to become a dominion with the same status as Canada,
then it would have to grant Northern Ireland the right of secession from the Irish
Free State (subject to a boundary commission). In 2018, the EU’s chief negotiator,
Michel Barnier, insists that, if there is to be a withdrawal agreement with the UK,
and an agreed political declaration over future relations between the UK and the
EU, then there has to be watertight and permanent legal provisions that prevent
fresh infrastructure across the UK land border in Ireland, in effect keeping
Northern Ireland within the EU’s single market and the customs union. In
2016–18, as was true in 1919–21, talk of Canada was in the air partly because of
the recognition, insistence, or denial that Northern Ireland should be treated
differently. For Barnier’s negotiating team, with the full authority of the EU 27,
short of technological transformations, the Irish backstop has to apply, especially
if Great Britain later insists on having a relationship with the EU modeled on its
former North American colony—that is, outside the said customs union and
single market. Lloyd George kept the Irish Free State in the British Empire on a
Canadian model and Northern Ireland within the UK; by contrast, Michel Barnier
may keep Northern Ireland within the single market and customs union of the EU
while freeing Great Britain to pursue its Canadian dream. If the DUP succeeds in
blocking this possible compromise, it may have to do so at the expense of
precipitating a hard and cliff-edge exit, from which Great Britain, Ireland, and
Northern Ireland will suffer, probably in that order of magnitude of pain. We shall
see whose bluff is called.
Johnson’s successor as UK Foreign Secretary, for now, is Jeremy Hunt. At the
Conservative Party Conference of October 2018 he compared the EU to the
USSR. The suggestion met with frank astonishment by ambassadors from East
European member states who had grown up behind the iron curtain. They were
not tempted to smile. Few of them, however, could have had higher diplomatic
Preface xiii
expectations of Hunt than his immediate predecessor. Hunt, after all, had recently
managed to describe his Chinese wife, Lucia Guo, as Japanese in the course of
exchanging pleasantries with his Chinese hosts. In short order, a UK foreign
secretary who displays bigoted impatience with the Irish, and who denigrates
other Europeans, has been replaced by one who nervously gets spectacularly
wrong both the ethnicity of his own wife and the ethnic histories of his principal
interlocutors. These presentational problems are not just the standard problem of
arrogant males who refuse to listen or learn, or who assume that others are not
competent to assess their own histories and interests. Rather, they are symptom-
atic of a crisis of professional gravitas among the current Conservative leadership.
The syndrome is equally evident among female politicians, and not just May
and Foster. The newest occupant of the role of Her Majesty’s Principal Private
Secretary of State for Northern Ireland is Karen Bradley MP. No evidence had
emerged to evaluate her ministerial worth when this volume was drafted, so the
text that follows avoided premature judgment. We now know a little more,
however, about this latest incumbent of a little-sought-after role. Bradley has a
BA in Mathematics from Imperial College London and was a professional tax
accountant in a previous life. She is therefore highly numerate. Yet she plainly
took no opportunity to learn imperial history at her alma mater. In September
2018 she told House magazine, the weekly circular of the mother of parliaments, of
her ignorance of Northern Ireland before May had assigned her to her new role.
“I didn’t understand things like when elections are fought, for example, in Northern
Ireland, people who are nationalists don’t vote for unionist parties and vice versa. So
the parties fight for the election within their own communities . . . That is a very
different world from the world I came from.” Indeed, Secretary of State. What,
however, was the more reprehensible in Bradley’s admission? Not knowing these
elementary political facts about Northern Ireland before her appointment, or being
entirely unembarrassed about subsequently revealing her ignorance on this matter
in a public interview that would be read by her peers?
Johnson, Hunt, May, and Bradley are among the latest in a line of English
politicians largely oblivious of Britain’s history in Ireland, and insensitive to the
potential pitfalls that their ignorance may trigger. At this moment in British–Irish
relations it may seem apt that figures from a Punch and Judy show are flitting
across the frozen stage. After all, negotiating UKEXIT, so far, resembles farce. But
tiresome and repetitive farce is not laugh inducing, and this farce cannot last
forever. The last rites may soon be performed on English imperial delusions, at the
hands of a Frenchman from central casting. The May government may surrender
to the EU, to be followed in turn by the Conservative party at Westminster, and
they may have enough Labour MPs to join them in steamrolling the DUP’s
resistance to the UK’s surrender to Brussels and the EU 27. If May does not
surrender, however, then the UK is programmed for a hard and cliff-edge exit that
she does not want, and for which her government and country are ill-prepared.
Unable to move in either direction, May could prove to be what George Osborne
has infamously described her as, “a dead woman walking.” She may yet be downed
in an internal Conservative heave. But there may also be no parliamentary
majority for any of the options facing the UK—a hard and cliff-edge exit with
no backstop (the Boris bluff); a soft exit that locks the UK permanently into the
customs union and the single market, making the backstop redundant (the
xiv Preface
Hammond halt); or a withdrawal agreement that codifies and entrenches the

backstop (the Barnier belt). In that case, the impasse may have to be broken by
a general election in the UK and/or by a second referendum on withdrawing from
the EU. We shall have to see.
Northern Ireland is in the eye of this diplomatic, parliamentary, and public
storm. To be fair to all of its residents, they did not ask to be put there. Serious
British politicians foresaw that a vote for UKEXIT would produce the outcomes
that are unfolding. Unfortunately, the centrist ex-prime ministers, John Major
and Tony Blair, who delivered these warnings, jointly, were ignored, and dis-
missed by lightweights such as Theresa Villiers and Owen Patterson. Northern
Ireland could have been removed from the diplomatic storm had the DUP
leadership chosen to see an opportunity to protect their constituents through
exceptional treatment under EU treaties and UK laws, rather than to deem a
differentiated UKEXIT as a mortal threat. They chose to see a dramatic threat to
their Britishness, and then dramatized that threat. In consequence, they may have
unintentionally endangered their long-term ties to the British state, by denying
English Conservatives their freedom. In the interim, the diplomatic world of
Europe has been reintroduced to the politics of antagonism birthed in the
colonization of Ulster. The overwhelming bulk of the descendants of the Irish
natives now ardently favor the European Union, while the leaders of the progeny
of British settlers strongly favor Brexit—though most of their local followers hope
it can be accomplished very softly, and with minimal disturbance.
The storm from UKEXIT has stalled the imaginative, painfully constructed, but
already troubled consociational power-sharing settlement ratified by the referen-
dums of 1998. As the diplomatic storm bears down in the five months before the
UK’s scheduled exit date of March 29, 2019, in what will probably be its most
intense phase, Northern Ireland has no official voice at any negotiating table.
Ireland speaks for its pro-remain majority, while Arlene Foster, who holds no
official non-party office, speaks of “blood-red” lines. Sinn Fein, so far, wisely
remains largely quiet, as the DUP surges toward what most reasonable economists
regard as an economic quagmire.
These unfolding developments underline a consistent theme of this treatise.
What is exogenous to Northern Ireland, especially but not only Great Britain and
Ireland, decisively shapes and reshapes the pattern of inter-group relations first
forged in colonial Ulster. Conflict and conflict regulation are shaped from outside,
not just within, and external shocks, especially deteriorations in British–Irish
relations, can damage significantly improved inter-group relations. Consociations
can flourish if they have external support; they may wither if that support dimin-
ishes or ends. Another consistent theme is underlined by these developments—
namely, the slow erosion since 1886, punctured by dramatic conjunctures, of
British hegemony, authority, and influence over Ireland and Northern Ireland.
No better evidence of that trend is Northern Ireland’s status as an obstacle to a
straightforward British exit from the EU. Great Britain cannot ride herd on its
creation, Northern Ireland, even when its own vital interests are at stake; Ireland,
by contrast, can mobilize the rest of the EU to protect the treaty and agreement
over Northern Ireland that it made jointly with Great Britain.
The future cannot be written with certainty, but it can partly be foretold, and
predictions and prophesies can subsequently be tested by the acidic evidence of
Preface xv
history. In a survey of Ireland published in January 1988, entitled “The Poorest of

the Rich,” The Economist predicted a catastrophic economic future for the emer-
ald isle. Ireland was attempting to develop a European welfare state without
sufficient wealth to underpin it: Frances Cairncross was quoted to the effect that
poor Ireland had behaved as if it was rich and would now pay the price. In May
1997, however, the same magazine ran an issue captioned “The Celtic Tiger:
Europe’s Shining Light,” celebrating an Irish growth miracle that would later
culminate in an estimated growth in GDP of approximately 230 percent in
the two decades 1987–2007 (compared with just over 150 percent in the UK
in the same period). In October 2004 The Economist followed up with another
issue called “The Luck of the Irish.” It attributed much of Ireland’s economic
success in the preceding two decades to one-off catch-up changes—for example,
increased workplace participation, especially by women; a younger population
and labor force than the European average; and EU subsidies worth around
0.5 percent a year of additional growth during the 1990s. To be fair, the flagship
of neoliberal economics gave some credit to Ireland’s policymakers and policies—
a quasi-corporatist social partnership between government, business, and trade
unions that helped keep inflation lower and employment higher; fiscal and
monetary consolidation before the arrival of the Euro; enthusiastic embrace of
the EU’s single market program; the sustained commitment to attracting foreign,
especially US, direct investment through a focus on low corporate tax rates and
providing an ever better-educated workforce, especially in information technol-
ogy, engineering, medicine, and the bio-sciences. Lastly, Ireland’s reduction in the
tax burden on its workforce boosted domestic demand and encouraged its skilled
workers and professionals to stay rather than emigrate.
The Economist, and others, were not wrong, however, to point to vulnerabilities
in the Irish economy—notably, membership of the Euro meant that Ireland
experienced interest-rate cuts at the top of its economic boom, encouraging an
unsustainable property bubble, radical financial risk-taking, and the over-
exposure of its banks to domestic and foreign debtors. The great crash of 2008,
in which Ireland’s GDP shrank by 4 percent, and then by a further 5 percent the
following year, seemed to signal a decisive end to Ireland’s run of good luck.
Ireland’s banks and shadow banks had to be bailed out. The Irish state had to be
bailed out by the EU, the ECB, and the IMF, and its budget-making supervised
during a humiliating suspension of its economic sovereignty. Public debt and
unemployment sky-rocketed, while the country once again became a net exporter
of people. Yet, remarkably, the Irish economy has since staged a stunning recovery.
It is one of the few cases in recent comparative economic history in which
borrowing reductions, spending cuts, and fiscal contraction have restabilized a
country’s public finances in short order, to be followed by significant fresh growth.
By 2017 Ireland’s estimated GDP per capita stood at over $68,000 compared to the
UK’s estimate of over $39,000; Ireland’s public debt per capita stood at $47,000
compared to the UK’s $34,300; Ireland’s public-sector deficit as a percentage of its
GDP stood at –0.30 percent compared with the UK’s –1.9 percent; and Ireland’s
unemployment rate in September 2018 of 5.4 percent compared with the UK’s
estimated 4 percent. Ireland’s economy had truly bounced back. Such GDP
comparisons and estimates can give a strikingly distorted evaluation of Ireland’s
economic performance, so it is best to rely on more sober Gross National Income
xvi Preface
comparisons, adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity. In 2017, however, the World
Bank’s staff estimated Ireland’s GNI PPP at $61,910, just higher than that of the
USA, and significantly ahead of the UK’s $42,560.
There are at least two reasons why these updated economic data matter for the
future of the subjects considered in this volume. They suggest, first, that the Irish
economy can withstand the negative repercussions that may flow from a hard and
cliff-edge UKEXIT, and that it has sufficient resources and robustness to make the
structural, logistical, and transportation adjustments that any UKEXIT may make
necessary. Ireland can expect some solidarity from its EU partners if this scenario
comes to pass, but it need not rely upon it. Secondly, it suggests that, whether the
future brings forth a cliff-edge UKEXIT, or one with a feather-bed landing, or
indeed a reversal of UKEXIT, sovereign Ireland will be able to afford Irish
reunification, and that both the North and South will stand to gain materially
from doing so. Whether Ireland’s voters will support reunification in any refer-
endum subsequent to one held in the North is another matter. The author would
expect the Dublin region to have the highest number of voters who would tick
‘No’ to reunification, but also expects the rest of Ireland to vote strongly to
overturn the repercussions of centuries of conquest. Yet, if Irish reunification is
to happen, ’twere best if it were done with preparation.
A new ministry for Irish national reunification and reconciliation would not be
premature. Its first planning agenda should include a long constitutional conven-
tion to address the new institutional configurations, territorial order, and protec-
tions of minority rights that would be required to make a success of reunification,
and how Northerners could participate in the remaking of the island. This vista, of
course, will revive language from down the centuries, and tracked throughout
these volumes. Warnings of a loyalist backlash or forelash will rent the air. Yet, if
and when a referendum is won by advocates of Irish reunification, it is most
unlikely that British regiments will be deployed in de facto alliance with loyalist
militias—as occurred in 1920, and again after 1970. An Ireland, moreover, that
has prepared its constitution and its institutions with proper, prudent, and
consultative foresight may be able to reunify with its lost counties with minimal
threat to any human life. Though other malign vistas cannot be excluded—including
those that start with premises based on Albion’s record of treaty-breaking—the one
just briefly sketched seems far likelier than at any previous time in this author’s life.
As I close the composition of this Preface, it has been officially announced that
Ireland’s Constitution has been amended once more. Its blasphemy laws, under
which no one was ever convicted, have been removed with popular assent, and
President Michael D. Higgins, a democratic socialist and a political scientist, has been
elected to a second term in office. Ireland’s politics currently continue to move to a
different and warmer rhythm than in many other democracies, where bleak intim-
ations of fascism are palpable. For Northern Ireland, voluntarily, to join in Ireland’s
positive transformations, with significant support from among its Protestant popu-
lation, would certainly entitle others to complain of the luck of the Irish.
Brendan O’Leary
Philadelphia
October 2018
Contents: Volume 3
List of Figures xxiii

List of Maps xxv
List of Tables xxvii
List of Boxes xxix
Abbreviations and Glossary xxxi
Terminology xli
3.1. Conceptual Conspectus: Consociation and Arbitration 1

Definitions and Types 1
Arguments about Consociations 2
Explaining the Formation of Consociations 16
Arbitration: Consociation’s Neglected Overseer 29
3.2. “No. Please Understand”: The Return to Imperial Direct Rule
and the Limits to British Arbitration, 1972–1985 33
The Mechanics of Direct Rule and its Opening Experiment 35
Party System Transformations, 1969–1985 44
Reforms and Opening Consociational Initiatives, 1972–1976 53
The Failed Negotiations between the British Government’s Agents
and the IRA, 1975–1976 66
A Second Counterinsurgency: Criminalization, Normalization,
and Ulsterization, 1976–1981 68
Hunger Strikes Defeat Criminalization 72
The Limits to Reform under Arbitration 75
The Second Wave of Consociational Initiatives, 1979–1982 79
Searching for a Way out of International and Domestic Embarrassment 83
3.3. An Experiment in Coercive Consociation: The Making, Meaning(s),
and Outcomes of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, 1985–1992 87
The Content of the AIA and its Rival Interpretations 87
Why was the AIA Signed? 95
The Nature of the Experiment 103
Impact of the Agreement, 1985–1991: Cooperation and Conflict
in British–Irish Relations 104
Party-Political Developments: Saying No, and Lancing the Boil 110
The Three-Stranded Republican and Nationalist Response to the AIA 119
Social and Legal Justice 124
Violence and Security 132
Conclusion 134
3.4. A Tract of Time between War and Peace: Melding Negotiations
and a Peace Process, and the Making of the Belfast and the
British–Irish Agreements, 1992–1998 135
The Brooke Initiative 135
“Talks about Talks” 136
When the Shooting Stopped 145
xviii Contents: Volume 3
How the Shooting Stopped 147

The Joint Declaration for Peace 151
The Framework Documents 154
Post-Framework Bargaining, 1995–1998 158
Agreeing a Text 170
Appendix 3.4.1. Brams’s and Togman’s Modeling of the Crisis of the
Peace Process 172
3.5. The Making, Meaning(s), and Tasks of the 1998 Agreement 175
The Name(s) of the Text(s) 175
The Passage of the Agreement 176
The Consociational and Non-Consociational Components 178
Powers and the Division of Powers 179
Assembly Rules and Procedures 179
Executive Power-Sharing: A Dual Premiership and d’Hondt Executive 182
Proportionality Rules 190
Communal Autonomy and Equality 198
Minority Veto Rights 200
Recognition All Around 201
The Foundations of a Federacy? 202
The First Moment of Suspension 204
Confederalizing Possibilities in the Agreement 207
Federalizing Possibilities in the Agreement 210
Belt and Braces: Double Protection 212
Confidence-Building and Responses to the Agreement(s) 214
Why Was the Agreement Made? 216
Assessment of the Agreement’s Initial Implementation 219
Appendix 3.5.1. The Election of David Trimble and Mark Durkan
as First Ministers 222
Appendix 3.5.2. Contra Horowitz and Lijphart, List-PR, STV (PR),
the Alternative Vote, and Northern Ireland 227
3.6. The Long Negotiation: The Tribunes Become Consuls, 2002–2016 230
From Stormontgate to Voluntary Disbanding: Twists and Turns in
the IRA’s Departure 236
The Promising Bargain: Sunningdale for Slow Learners? 244
The Housetraining of the DUP and Sinn Féin 247
The Brief Ascendancy and Fast Fall of the House of Paisley 254
The Consulate of Robinson and McGuinness: Getting Past
Whited Sepulchers 258
Languages and Flags: The Tongues of our Ancestors and Vexed Vexillology 264
Agreement after Agreement after Agreement . . . 269
Who Won the War, the Peace, and Who should Take the Blame? 282
Preliminary Conclusion on Readings of the Dirty Peace 289
3.7. Confederal and Consociational Futures 290
The Year of the Four Votes (May 2016–June 2017) 294
Irish Futures: A Dozen Hostages to Fortune 304
Confederal and Federal Futures? 312
Consociation: Breakdown, Amendment, or Decay? 324
Northern Transformations 330
Never Giving Up? 337
Southern Transformations and the Questions of Reunification 340
Contents: Volume 3 xix
Whither Partitionism? Uladh and the Erosion of the Possibility

of East Ulster 347
The Fading of Old Arguments 352
Peeking through Three Twilights 352
Last Words 360
Notes 365
Acknowledgments 391
Bibliography 397
Index of Names 429
General Index 439
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
hand daily; but right hands and right eyes must be parted with for
Him, who ordereth all things well.
I would believe thy promise, Lord;
O help my unbelief!
Leaving you to add a heart-felt Amen, I am, my very dear Tommy,
Less than the least of all,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCVII.
To Mr. and Mrs. D――.
London, March 17, 1769.
My dear Friends,
I HOPE this will find you not only at, but fixed at Bethesda. Your
brother James yesterday told me, “He thought it best.” It is not a
time to think of leaving a happy wilderness now. There’s more noise
in great cities. I am every day, every hour, almost every moment,
thinking of and preparing for America. A pilgrim life to me is the
sweetest on this side eternity. I am daily expecting Bethesda
accompts. I am daily waiting for the kingdom of God. God bless my
poor negroes. I am always, my dear friends,
Yours, &c. &c. in the Friend of all,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCVIII.
To Mr. A――s.
London, March 31, 1769.
My very dear Tommy,
Y OU will be glad to hear, that frequent preaching hath prevented

writing. Through infinite mercy I have been enabled to preach
four days successively. And indeed we have been favoured with a
blessed passover season. All to make us shout louder and louder,
Grace! grace! I have some thoughts of making Gloucestershire my
first excursion: but at present the cloud abides over London. Lord
Jesus, direct my goings in thy way! The books will be sent. Mr.
S――e hath done as desired: I believe he goes to Bath next week.
B――’s coming was, I think, of God. She seems happy in her
present situation. In heaven we shall be perfectly so. Till then, some
right hand or eye must be cutting off, and plucking out, and we shall
feel the smart and want of both. But all is well, because all will end
well. Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Come, Lord, come! I can now no more.
Adieu. God bless you all! Cease not to pray, my very dear Tommy,
for
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCIX.
To the Reverend Mr. S――y.
London, April 1, 1769.

Reverend and very dear Sir,
H OW much am I obliged to you, for your two kind letters, and

more especially for the repeated offers of your ministerial
assistance. They will be most gratefully accepted, and I humbly hope
remarkably succeeded, by Him who hath promised to be with us
always even to the end of the world. Blessed be his name, we have
been favoured with delightful passover feasts. The shout of the King
of kings is still heard in the midst of our Methodist camps; and the
shout of Grace, grace! resounds from many quarters. Our almighty
Jesus knows how to build his temple in troublous times. His work
prospers in the hands of the elect Countess, who is now gone to
Bath, much recovered from her late indisposition. Worthy Lady
F――y proposes soon to follow, in order to reside there. Some more
coronets, I hear, are likely to be laid at the Redeemer’s feet. They
glitter gloriously when set in, and surrounded with a crown of thorns.
Subjects of the Lord, be bold;
Jesus will his kingdom hold:
Wheels encircling wheels must run,
Each in course to bring it on.
I know who joins in crying, Hallelujah! Even a Waller, a Harriot, both

heirs of the grace of life. That the Spirit of Christ and of glory may
abide and rest upon them here, and that they may shine with
distinguished lustre in his heavenly kingdom hereafter, most
earnestly prays,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCX.
To Mr. R―― K――n.
Bath, April 18, 1769.
My dear Friend,
H ITHERTO God hath helped us. A good opening at Chippenham.

A precious season here on Sunday morning. This evening I am
to preach again. To-morrow, God willing, I shall set out for Bristol,
and return hither on Saturday morning. I hope to write to Mr. W――r,
by to-morrow’s or Thursday’s post. I thank him for his punctual
sending the papers. I find by them, who is dead, and by this time
buried in Saint S――n’s chapel. The question is, whether there will
be a resurrection, or what will be the consequence? Whatever it be,
this is our consolation, “the Lord reigneth. Blessed be the God of
our salvation!” I hope this will find dear Mr. E――s proclaiming it with
abundant success. Tender love to him and to all. Surely they will not
cease to pray for,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXI.
To Mr. W――hy.
Bristol, April 28, 1769.
My dear Mr. W――hy,
I SUPPOSE you have heard, that all arrived safe at Georgia,

February 26. The very moment they cast anchor, fifteen miles
from Savannah, an opportunity offered to send a few lines. This is
the reason no other letters are yet come. More may be expected
daily. Be so good as to send a line of information to Essex. I believe
an opportunity will soon present, to write by the ship bound for
Savannah. My packet is to come up early next week. We finish at
Bath next Sunday. About a week more I stay in Bristol, or
thereabouts. Good seasons every where. What a mercy, that while
the potsherds of the earth are dashing each other in pieces, the great
Head of the church is building up his spiritual Jerusalem! That you
and yours may be daily built up in the most holy faith, earnestly
prays,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXII.
To Mr. R―― K――n,
Bristol, May 4, 1769.
My dear old Friend,
T HIS evening we are to have a love feast; yesterday had a good

field preaching at Kingswood. The night before I preached here.
God willing, to-morrow here again. Sunday morning at Bradford.
Monday at Frome. Then Chippenham, and other parts of
Gloucestershire. I designed to go to Plymouth, but I have such a
cold, and the weather begins to be so warm, that I know not how the
issue will be. Hitherto, blessed be God, we have had golden
seasons. A letter may be sent by Saturday’s post, to Mr. B――s, at
Frome. I hope all continues to go on well. Brethren, pray for us! I sent
some letters for Georgia, to the care of Mr. W――hy, but have heard
nothing from him. I wish you would write one line to my humble
friend, and tell him he is enquired after every where, and all are glad
to hear of his safe arrival. Grace! grace! That all may prosper both in
soul and body, earnestly prays, my dear old friend,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXIII.
To the Same.
Frome, May 8, 1769.
My dear Friend,
M ANY thanks for your kind letter. A blessed day yesterday in

Bradford church. A blessed day here in the fields; thousands
attended, all more than solemn. Mrs. M――re I hope was touched at
Bath last Tuesday sevennight. Glorious prospect in these parts.
Grace! grace! I am now going to Chippenham, Castlecomb, Dursley,
Rodborough, Painswick, Gloucester, ♦ Cheltenham, in my way to
London. The west circuit must be deferred, on account of the
opening the chapel at Tunbridge. I am easy about London, being so
well supplied. God bless you all! All send cordial respects. W――s’s
inadvertencies grieve me. You will be punctual. I hope to answer
Captain J――s in a post or two. Love and thanks to Mr. E――s.
Lord prosper the gospel plough! Adieu, I must away. Cease not to
pray for, my dear Sir,
Yours, &c. in Jesus,
G. W.
♦ “Chentlenam” replaced with “Cheltenham”
LETTER MCCCCXIV.
To Mr. J――s.
Rodborough, May 11, 1769.
E BENEZER, Ebenezer! Through infinite mercy, I just now arrived

here. Blessed seasons at Chippenham, Castlecomb and
Dursley, in our way from Frome. Have been enabled to preach five
times this week. It is good to go into the highways and hedges. Field-
preaching, field-preaching for ever! Cannot yet determine what
course to steer next. At present a very heavy cold lies upon me.
Jesus’s warm love more than makes amends for all. God fill all your
dear souls with it! I am easy, as you go on well in London. God bless
you all. By Saturday’s post you may know further concerning, my
dear Captain,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXV.
To Mr. T―― A――ms.
London, May 18, 1769.
My very dear old Friend,

O N Monday evening we reached Letchlade, on Tuesday
Maidenhead, on Wednesday about noon, through infinite
mercy, we got safe to town. Ebenezer, Ebenezer! My cold is about
the same as when we parted. But who knows what the Father of
mercies may do for less than the least of all his children, by next
Lord’s-day morning? Perhaps we may be favoured with another
Rodborough pentecost. Never was that place so endeared to me, as
at this last visit. Old friends, old gospel wine, and the great Governor
ordering to fill to the brim!
O to grace what mighty debtors! &c. &c.
I suppose you will sing that hymn soon; and if we should die in
singing it? What then? Why then, welcome, welcome eternity! God
bless you all! Yesterday I saw your sister J――s comforted under her
trial. I see, whether married or single, thorns in the flesh we must
have. But Christ’s grace will be sufficient for us. Hallelujah!
Hallelujah! Brethren, pray for us. Cordial respects to Mrs. A――s; I
think her name is Phebe. I hope to send a few lines to Mrs. R――s
and Mrs. H――r very soon; in the mean while entreat them, and all
like-minded, to accept most grateful acknowledgments, and most
cordial respects, and be assured of being always remembered in the
poor prayers of, my very dear Tommy,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXVI.
To Mr. S―― S――.
London, May 26, 1769.
My very dear Friend,

H OW did I send all over Bath, to enquire for you and yours! How
have I since prayed, that your present use of the baths may be
blessed to the recovery of your valuable health, and your soul
sweetly refreshed with drinking the waters of life freely! Both these
things, I hope you do and will experience fully. However it may be on
earth, glory, glory be to free grace! we are assured that we shall have
a perfect consummation of bliss, both in body and soul, in heaven.
Jesus, thou son of David! Jesus, thou Son of God! Jesus, thou God
over all, God blessed for evermore! give us patience to wait till this
wished-for time shall come! I suppose you have heard of my
hoarseness, gotten, through mercy, in the highways and hedges. A
delightful spring campaign. Many, I trust, were compelled to come in.
Such news will gladden you, because it gladdens the angels which
are in heaven. With regret I must shorten this. I shall send to know
how you both do. God only knows, how you are beloved and
remembered by, my very dear friends,
Yours, &c. in Jesus,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXVII.
To the Same.
London, June 10, 1769.
My very dear old Friend,
H OW glad was I to find, that you could write so long a letter! Who
knows but the withered hand may be yet stretched out? “Abba,
Father!” all things are possible with thee! Grant it, if it be thy blessed
will, for Jesus Christ’s sake! This leaves me a little recovering from
my late indisposition, consequently it leaves me singing, “He will not
always be chiding, neither will he keep his anger for ever.” How truly,
how incomparably great, will these loving corrections make us in a
future state? Then shall we sing without sorrowing,
O happy, happy rod,
That brought us hither to our God!
In patience, therefore, may we possess our souls! Yet a little while,

and he that cometh will come, and will not tarry. God be praised, that
your dear nurse and yoke-fellow holds out so well. Mr. M――s tells
me she is brave. Mr. D――n dines with me, at his house, on Friday;
both will then be remembered. The covenant of grace was made
from eternity. Hallelujah, Hallelujah! Come Lord, come!
Ever yours, &c. &c. in our Jesus,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXVIII.
London, July 29, 1769.
My very dear Friend,
I THANK you for your intended benefaction. Our Lord will write
himself your debtor for it. His interest is pretty good, “a hundred
fold.” A hundred fold! what can the most avaricious trader desire
more? It comes very opportunely; for in looking over my Georgia
letters this morning, I find Mr. Dixon desires me to purchase negro
cloth, and osnabrigs for the negroes, in London; it will be a great
saving, and render double service to my dear orphan family. In about
a month or five weeks I hope to set sail. I long for your return, wish
you could shorten your Scarborough expedition. I want to consult you
in many things; and in particular, to have proper writings drawn up,
empowering you, as my attorney, to act in all things as if I was
present. O that you may have the presence of our great Advocate, to
guide, guard, and protect you in journeying! May he be a wall of fire
round about you, and be your wisdom, righteousness, sanctification,
and all in all! My hearty love to Mr. E――ds, Mr. G――th, Mr.
A――ge, &c. &c. That the Lord may richly reward you for all your
disinterested labours of love, and bless you and yours in time and
eternity, is the constant prayer of, my dear dear friend,
Yours most affectionately in an unchangeable Jesus,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXIX.
To Mr. B――s.
London, July 30, 1769.
My dear Sir,
O LD friendship and love embolden me to send these few lines.

Blessed be God! the orphan-house affairs go on well, and a
lasting ample foundation is now laid, for the future support and
education of both rich and poor. Perhaps providence may call me to
Georgia this fall. Could you present the infant institution with a book
or two of maps, or copies, or copper-plates, as you shall judge most
proper? Sheet maps will not do in that hot climate. I should also be
glad of some maps, shewing the different coastings, &c. for my own
amusement when on board. Glory be to God, all sublunary coastings
will soon be over. Yet a little while, and we shall get into an eternal
harbour. Jesus is the way, Jesus is our pilot. To his almighty never-
failing guidance and grace, I most earnestly commit you, and all your
near and dear connections, as being, my dear old friend,
Yours, &c. &c. &c. &c. in our common Lord,
G. W.
P. S. If the motion is not approved of, silence shall serve for an

answer.
LETTER MCCCCXX.
To Mr. J――s.
Tottenham-Court, August 9, 1769.
My dear Captain,
M Y last to ――, will make you guess that my hands and heart are
full. Last night I went on board the Friendship; the Captain is
to dine with me to-morrow. I expect to sail the first week in
September at furthest. You must be then in town. Mr. Brooksbanks (if
Mr. K――n does not come) will supply your place. I hope all things
will be settled on a right plan. You may be assured of my having,
under God, the greatest confidence in you. I only wish some means
may be found out to save the late great expence of coach hire. It
hath mounted very high. But more of this when we meet. Blessed be
God for smiling on your labours. This is the way; you need not be
exhorted to continue to walk in it. God bless you! God bless you! Mr.
K――n is expected from his Yorkshire tour on Saturday. All is well at
home. Cordial love to all. Brethren, pray for us. With regret I am
obliged to hasten to subscribe myself, my dear man,
Yours, yours, &c. &c. &c. in our never-failing Jesus,

G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXI.
London, August 19, 1769.
My very dear Tommy,
T ALK not of taking a personal leave. You know my make. Paul

could stand a whipping, but not a weeping farewel. My heart
and hands are full. What a letter-night last Thursday evening! a night
much to be remembered. Many thanks for your intended present. In
ten days I expect to sail. God bless you and yours! God bless all our
never to be forgotten Gloucestershire friends! I can no more. Adieu.
Cease not to pray for, my very dear steady old friend,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXII.
To Mr. J――ss.
London, August 19, 1769.
My very dear Man,
B LESSED, for ever blessed be the God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, for causing his word so to run, and so to be
glorified in your hands. No wonder that you meet with a thorn in the
flesh. But we know who hath said, “My grace is sufficient for thee.” I
have no objection against your circuit westward. I believe it will be a
blessing to many souls. In a few days I expect to hear that either Mr.
D――cy or S――y will be in town. If so, you may proceed; if not, I
must beg you to be here at the time of my departure. Ten days, and
then. What then? You may guess. God bless you and yours. God
bless all dear, christian, never-to-be-forgotten Bristol friends. Last
Thursday evening was a parting letter-night indeed. A night much to
be remembered. Your flaming letter was read. That God may make
you flame more and more, till you are called to be a flaming seraph in
yonder heaven, earnestly prays, my very dear man,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXIII.
On board the Friendship, Captain Ball,

September 5, 1769. Six in the Morning.
My very dear Tommy,
A LTHOUGH I could not write to you whilst ashore, yet I must drop
you a few lines now I am come aboard. Just now we have
taken up the anchor: and I trust my anchor is cast within the veil,
where the ground will never give way, otherwise, how should I have
stood the shock of parting, and put to sea at this time, or rather at
this decline of life? But our God can, and our God does renew both
bodily and spiritual strength. I have not been in better spirits for some
years; and I am persuaded this voyage will be for the Redeemer’s
glory, and the welfare of precious and immortal souls. I am assured I
fare the better for the prayers of my dear very dear Gloucestershire
friends. Our parting solemnities have been exceedingly awful; and I
thank God for giving me the honour of taking my leave on Sunday
afternoon at Gravesend market-place. O for this rambling way of
preaching till I die! If Mrs. H――ker gets into harbour before me, she
will be well off. Cordial respects await her, your wife, Mrs. R――ts,
and all the friends of Zion. O England! England! God preserve thee
from and divert every threatening storm! Follow, follow with your
prayers, and assure yourselves of not being forgotten by, my very
dear friends,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXIV.
To Mrs. H――ge.
On board the Friendship, September 6, 1769.
Dear Mrs. H――ge,
R EPEATED labours of love demand repeated acknowledgments.

God bless and reward you and your daughter! I hope you both
returned home laden with the grapes of the New-Jerusalem.
Gravesend Bethels, I trust, will not easily be forgotten. I am sure you
do not forget to pray for a very worthless worm: a worm, and no man!
And yet, (O amazing love!) Jesus, a never-failing, ever-loving,
altogether-lovely Jesus, careth for and comforts him on every side.
Hitherto it seems like my first voyage. Grace! grace! What hath God
wrought? With all thy mercies, glorious Emmanuel, deny not the
mercy of a thankful heart! Had I more humility, I should be more
thankful to God and man. But I once more bid you and yours farewel.
Salute all dear friends as they come in your way, and tell them their
prayers are and will be heard in behalf of, my dear Mrs. H――e,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXV.
To Mr. and Mrs. S――n.
Dear Friends,
A CCEPT a line of grateful acknowledgment for all favours. I know

it will find you busy: and busy, I believe, for the Redeemer’s
glory. You, therefore, shall and will prosper. This comforts me in my
present gospel enterprize. I am persuaded it is of, from, and for Him
who loved me, and gave himself for me, even ill and hell-deserving
me. Glory be to his great name, I am comforted on every side. Fine
accommodations. A civil Captain and passengers. All willing to
attend on divine worship, and to hear of religious things. Praise the
Lord, O my soul! Faithful mother W――d, and all at Tabernacle, will
be glad to hear of this. Pray desire her to remember me in the
kindest manner to Mr. P――ts, Mr. and Mrs. T――r, Mr. and Mrs.
B――s, &c. &c. I remember parting tears. Jesus hath bottled them
up. Brethren, pray and give thanks to Him, whose mercy endureth
for ever. I am brave as to my bodily health. Grace! grace! God bless
you and yours, and all who are so kind as to be concerned for, and
enquire after, my dear old friends,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXVI.
To Mr. W――hy.
Dear Mr. W――hy,
O THESE partings! Without a divine support they would be

intolerable. But with that, we can even do this and every thing
besides, which we are called to do or suffer. You will be glad to hear
that every thing turns out beyond expectation, as to bodily health,
ship accommodation, civility of passengers, &c. I only want
somebody that hath a little more brains about me: but we must have
our buts in this trying imperfect state. Say what we will, without these
things we could not have our graces kept in exercise. God preserve
you and all my religious friends, amidst the exercises that I fear await
them. Nothing less than an almighty power can preserve and keep
them in a proper temper. Land-storms are often most dangerous. Tell
all as they come in your way, that their prayers are heard. I serve a
God whose mercy endureth for ever. Particular respects to Mr.
H――s, Mr. B――n, Mr. S――s, Mr. W――e, and all that accounted
it their privilege to assist an unworthy worm: not forgetting poor
mother E――s. You would all be pleased to see how well I am.
Grace! grace! O the privilege and honour of leaving a little All, for a
great unfailing All the ever-blessed God! May you be kept unspotted,
that are called to abide by the stuff. You are surprizingly improved as
to politeness of behaviour: may the inward man be more than
equally improved, and increase with all the increase of God day by
day! You will not fail to pray, that this may be also the happy case of,
my dear Mr. W――y,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXVII.
To Mrs. M――.
T HOUGH on the mighty waters, I must not forget faithful friends

that I have left behind. You, I am persuaded, are one of these. I
have tried you many years. God bless you and yours! God guide
and keep you in your new undertaking! You are launching into a wide
sea. May Jesus be your pilot! He will, he will. He is the widow’s
husband, and will therefore plead the widow’s cause. He is good to
us on board. Praise Him, praise Him whose mercy endureth for ever.
Cease not to pray for, dear Mrs. M――,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXVIII.
My dear steady Friend,
E BENEZER! Ebenezer! Hitherto the Lord helps. All things are

very commodious on board, and hitherto I am comforted on
every side. The Captain and passengers are civil, willing to oblige,
and ready to attend on divine worship. We have had contrary winds
in our way to the Downs, but not violent. The young soldiers not yet
sick, though the ship hath some motion. I seem to be now, as I was
thirty years ago. Grace! grace! Praise the Lord, O my soul! The
prayers of the dear Londoners are and will be heard. May the
mercies bestowed upon us in answer to their prayers, redound to thy
glory, O my God! The care of my annual pensioners, with all money
matters, I must beg you to take wholly into your hands. O how little
can I do for Him, who hath done and suffered so much for me! God
be merciful to me a sinner! Tender love to all. Cease not, cease not
to pray forwards, and to pray back again, my very dear Sir,
G. W.
LETTER MCCCCXXIX.
To Mr. and Mrs. F――tt.
The Downs, on board the Friendship,

September 10, 1769.
My very dear Friends,
A S we are now at our first baiting-place, and I have been thinking

of and praying for my tried, steady, uniform friends, no wonder
that you two came strongly upon my mind. Accept cordial thanks for
all favours, and add to my manifold obligations by praising Him,
whose mercy endureth for ever. He deals bountifully with us on
board, and gives us a prospect of being comfortable with all about
us. You are called to stay by, but blessed be God you are called to
live above the stuff. A pilgrim life is my lot. I am more than content
with it. I shall have time enough to rest in heaven. This heaven is
begun on earth. You know it, you know it. Ere long the budding
flower will be full blown. Afflictions, temptations, ordinances,
providences, will all concur to bring it to maturity. When this is done,
death shall transplant it to a better soil where it shall never fade, but
increase in fragrance and beauty through the endless ages of
eternity. But I must not detain you. This is your busy day. You have
been gathering manna. A little hath fallen round our floating camp. I
know you wish us a trading voyage. That you may sail into harbour

Full download A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 3: Consociation and Confederation Brendan O&#39;Leary file pdf all chapter on 2024

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Full download A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 3: Consociation and Confederation Brendan O&#39;Leary file pdf all chapter on 2024

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume

3: Consociation and Confederation

A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 1: Colonialism

A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 2: Control

Lucky Clover: A Paddy's Day Novella: RBMC Book 2.5

Policing and Combating Terrorism in Northern Ireland

Harmony from Discords: A Life of Sir John Denham

The Catholic Church and the Northern Ireland Troubles,

Deniable Contact: Back-Channel Negotiation in Northern

The European Union and the Northern Ireland Peace

A TREATISE ON NORTHERN IRELAND

From Antagonism to Accommodation?

To Anna, Hana and Leila, my daughters, who know how to

¹ Guardian, September 28, 2018.

Hammond halt); or a withdrawal agreement that codiﬁes and entrenches the

history. In a survey of Ireland published in January 1988, entitled “The Poorest of

List of Figures xxiii

3.1. Conceptual Conspectus: Consociation and Arbitration 1

xviii Contents: Volume 3

How the Shooting Stopped 147

Contents: Volume 3 xix

Whither Partitionism? Uladh and the Erosion of the Possibility

I would believe thy promise, Lord;

Leaving you to add a heart-felt Amen, I am, my very dear Tommy,

Less than the least of all,

London, March 17, 1769.

Yours, &c. &c. in the Friend of all,

London, March 31, 1769.

My very dear Tommy,

Y OU will be glad to hear, that frequent preaching hath prevented

Less than the least of all,

London, April 1, 1769.

H OW much am I obliged to you, for your two kind letters, and

Subjects of the Lord, be bold;

Jesus will his kingdom hold:

Wheels encircling wheels must run,

Each in course to bring it on.

I know who joins in crying, Hallelujah! Even a Waller, a Harriot, both

Less than the least of all,

Bath, April 18, 1769.

H ITHERTO God hath helped us. A good opening at Chippenham.

Less than the least of all,

Bristol, April 28, 1769.

My dear Mr. W――hy,

I SUPPOSE you have heard, that all arrived safe at Georgia,

Less than the least of all,

Bristol, May 4, 1769.

My dear old Friend,

T HIS evening we are to have a love feast; yesterday had a good

Less than the least of all,

Frome, May 8, 1769.

M ANY thanks for your kind letter. A blessed day yesterday in

Yours, &c. in Jesus,

Rodborough, May 11, 1769.

E BENEZER, Ebenezer! Through infinite mercy, I just now arrived

Less than the least of all,

London, May 18, 1769.

My very dear old Friend,

Less than the least of all,

London, May 26, 1769.

My very dear Friend,

Yours, &c. in Jesus,

London, June 10, 1769.

My very dear old Friend,

Full download A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 3: Consociation and Confederation Brendan O'Leary file pdf all chapter on 2024

Full download A Treatise on Northern Ireland, Volume 3: Consociation and Confederation Brendan O'Leary file pdf all chapter on 2024