The 1934 East Donegal unionist petition to join Northern Ireland, and its lessons for a united Ireland
Samuel G. Beckton
This year marks the centenary of the 1924–5 Irish Boundary Commission, a reflection of how the boundary lines of partition left some unionist and nationalist communities on the “wrong” side of the border. It is also the 90th anniversary of a lesser-known event, the East Donegal border petition. In November 1934, in East Donegal, 7,368 Protestants signed a petition calling for their region to be incorporated into Northern Ireland.[1] The East Donegal petition came as a reaction to Fianna Fáil policies after the 1932 general election, which initiated the process of cutting the Free State’s ties with the UK by abolishing the oath of allegiance, the right of appeal to the Privy Council and prerogatives of the Governor-General. The most important change for Southern loyalists was the Irish and Nationality Citizenship Bill, which created a new definition of Free State citizenship and was viewed by many as purporting to deprive Free State citizens of their rights as British subjects.[2] The Statute of Westminster 1931 made these changes legal. To exacerbate matters, in 1932–8 an Anglo-Irish trade war known as the Economic War depressed agricultural prices. Its impact was especially felt in the border counties that relied on cross border trade. In fact, most of the original petition instigators were farmers and used their influence to rally East Donegal’s Protestants through the Orange Order and elements of the Donegal Protestant Association. Planning began in July 1934, with experienced members to organize and collect signatures from the Ulster Covenant in 1912, and sought help from the Irish Loyalist Imperial Federation and the Ulster Unionist party.
The role of the press proved pertinent; reporting in 1934 mostly stated that the petition obtained 8,000 signatures, such as the Belfast News-Letter, yet other figures were published. The manner in which the petition was reported often reflected newspapers’ political leanings. The nationalist Derry Journal, for example, said that the petition originally claimed to represent 5,000 loyalists, based on the draft petition, while the more unionist Irish Times asserted 8,500 and the Irish edition of the Daily Express claimed 10,000.
How did the Irish government handle such a petition? The Garda became involved investigating suspected instigators of the movement, including independent Protestant councillors on the County Council and TD Major James Myles, despite not being involved. Furthermore, a district justice from Letterkenny, Louis Walsh, called the petition treasonous. He claimed it could threaten war in Ireland that could in turn throw the rest of Europe into conflict, with the petitioners facing legal action. However, instead of quelling the petition, his threats inflamed the matter as newspapers across the British Empire reported the movement and Walsh was internationally condemned. The Australian Daily Telegraph ran the headline ‘WALSH TRAILS HIS COAT’; the Southern Rhodesian (Zimbabwe) Bulawayo Chronicle headline was ‘ASKING FOR TROUBLE IN IRELAND’; and the South African Cape Argus featured ‘OUTBURST BY A JUDGE’.
Even though the petition went nowhere, the anger was eventually directed elsewhere. From 1934 to 1938, Donegal milk farmers protested the Northern Ireland Milk Act, which restricted dairy products from outside the UK coming into Northern Ireland. In response, Donegal farmers still entered their traditional markets in Derry and Strabane, regardless of potential fines or arrest. The police in Northern Ireland did not interfere with these farmers, apart from issuing warnings informing them that they were open to prosecution for being without a licence, and taking names of milk vendors from the Free State selling their goods in Derry and Strabane. Despite threats from Stormont, Donegal farmers kept going over the border to trade their goods. This series of stand-offs and threats became known as the ‘Derry–Donegal milk war’.
Though the petition for re-partition ultimately failed to change the border it offers a number of insights in the debate over a united Ireland. If partition were to end, this would certainly concern many unionists as their representatives would be a minority within the Oireachtas. If there were no compromises for unionists in a united Ireland, such as a federal system to retain a devolved Northern Ireland, this could cause a crisis in the form of an economic recession, which might be a catalyst to show Unionist discontentment towards the Irish government. In the event of a united Ireland, trade with Great Britain will have to continue unhindered. Seeking to replace traditional economic links within Northern Ireland will not work, just as Free State government efforts to help Donegal farmers did not. Alcohol factories were established in Carndonagh and Manorcunningham to encourage farmers to grow potatoes, and a bacon curing factory in Letterkenny. These sites came into operation in 1937 and 1940, but did not compensate for the loss of the milk trade. Under such a situation, it would not be hard to fathom that a repeated course of events of what occurred in East Donegal in 1934 could occur again by disgruntled Ulster Unionists. The only difference will be the approach of Irish government, both due to learning from the past and of fear of the backlash from the modern media and endangering the Northern Irish peace process.
Overall, even though the East Donegal petition was nearly a century ago, it is a valuable reminder that not everyone embraces change. Even though change would come in the event of a united Ireland, it is the responsibility of those in power to ensure that nobody is forgotten in the process of unification. For the tricolour nation to be realised, it must look towards the Irish flag for how a united Ireland could succeed, finding peaceful compromises to bring all together.
[1] National Archives of Ireland, Petition for the inclusion of Donegal in Northern Ireland, 2008/117/875
[2] Hansard, 1803–2005, 2 April 1935, HL Debate vol. 96, cc. 502–16.
For more information, contact:
Samuel Gary Beckton, The East Donegal Border Petition and the Derry–Donegal Milk War, 1934-8 (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2023).
